From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 1 02:02:52 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 19:02:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still making the rounds. spike On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something interesting to > say a few days ago: > === > > * Reality is a Communist Plot* > > > * by Paul Krugman* > > *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism > . > But hydroxychloroquine > worked, > and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people > .* > > *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout > during > the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t > shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, > not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake > its > 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* > > *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging for a > deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a result of > the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* > > *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 > percent approval rating > .* > > *Trump won the 2020 election.* > > *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* > > *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates immigrants > (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it hates > scientists.* > > *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci > ? > which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what > Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they > want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points > out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to > shoot the messenger.* > > *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some people > on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing high > housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists > insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even > how most voters think about politics > ? > is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* > > *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I try > to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and > admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* > > *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. It?s > something far more extreme.* > > *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they don?t > hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss > scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re > perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the > face.* > > *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which > nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has > ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend > ,? > when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that > you must show ID to buy groceries > , > which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* > > *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see it, > that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even > accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says > that they don?t.* > > *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all about > this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war > ? > he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* > > *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured what > they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must > make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? existed > and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was always a > considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by almost > everyone.* > > *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. Furthermore, > reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* > > *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? well, > it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two and two > are five.* > > *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over the > top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* > > *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act as if > they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, > anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any > deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members > of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many > Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between > fantasy and reality.* > > *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump speeches > are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments > ,? > because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to > stop clapping.* > > *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come as a > surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It involves > a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious > fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a > subject to be delved into another day.* > > *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on > America as a whole.* > > *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would > have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to > refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and > other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with > Trump or his successor still in charge.* > > *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more pollution > even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* > > *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because he > won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted our > weapon stocks with stunning speed.* > > *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Aug 1 02:43:02 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 19:43:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Superintelligent AI civilisations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The realities of hardware make computation harder. You need to get the power in and the heat out. My thoughts on the civilization sunk in the ocean include power inside, and outside the sphere, and communication sideways. If the object around Tabby's star is a data center holding trillions of aliens, they are getting light for power on the inward side and heat out on the outside. Communication goes sideways. It is 2.5 light seconds wide. I have never thought free-floating computronium was a good idea. The station maintenance is onerous, heat radiation is blocked, and communication is difficult. Locking space-based computation devices in a lattice seems a lot easier. Besides the communication delay in something the size of Jupiter, it would have to be slow to keep the heat down. That does not mean really smart AIs are limited, but it seems to me they would be built with rather compact elements. Keith PS, We hear nothing from Tabby's star and see no laser beams. I sort of wonder, have we entirely missed some non-electromagnetic way of communication? It seems unlikely. Perhaps they don't communicate, though that seems unlikely. On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 6:50?AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > The formulas around the physical limits of computation paint a clear > picture on the trade offs. > > Mass defines total computations per second, which may be parallel or > serial. > > Black holes represent the maximum clock speed for a serial computations > that must touch every bit. > > Less dense volumes provide more memory for a given mass of computer, but > at correspondingly slower clock speeds than when that matter is compressed > to the density of a black hole. Here is table with some examples: > > See page 213: > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dnQ-suYTQ984_nB3uVr9AWN2Zet3RnMj/view?usp=drivesdk > > So comparing 1 Kg of computronium spread across a 1 meter radius > (diffuse), vs. computronium at black hole densities where 1 Kg is > compressed to a radius of 1.49 ? 10^?27 meters (dense): > > > Memory diffuse: 1.79 ? 10^43 bits > Memory dense: 2.65 ? 10^16 bits > > The diffuse computronium has way more memory to work with. The dense > computer has only a few KB. But now compare serial clock speed: > > Clock rate diffuse: 3.00 ? 10^8 Hz > Clock rate dense: 2.02 ? 10^35 Hz > > So the diffuse computronium operates at Pentium 2 levels of speed, a few > hundred MHz. > > So there are rather severe memory and speed trade offs, even when dealing > with the best physically possible computer. > > You might think, well just add more mass to the computer, collapse the > Jupiter brain planet into a Jupiter brain black hole. That would increase > the memory considerably (to ~10^71 bits) but it would also reduce the clock > speed even further, as the Jupiter black hole has a radius of 2.8 meters, > it's clock time (time to access any bit) would be r/c = 9.33 nanoseconds, > for a clock rate of 107 MHz. > > If you want speed and memory, a better engineering compromise is required. > A bunch of small and dense computers running in parallel on their own > dedicated tasks, and networked and positioned near to, those other > computers they might need the outputs they produce. Perhaps this isn't too > different from the current generation of CPUs or GPUs with many cores, > shared memory and various levels of caches for each processor, clustered in > data centers with high speed networking between them. > > > > Jason > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 6:50?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 12:42?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >> >> *> Light speed has always been my objection to physically large brains.* >>> >> >> *I think Mr. Jupiter Brain will be composed of billions or trillions of >> closely interlocked agents just as many modern AI's are, although they >> usually only have a few hundred. Some of those agents would be generalists >> and some of them would be specialists. Jupiter is about 85,000 miles in >> diameter, light travels at 186,000 miles a second. So AT MOST it would take >> about 0.46 seconds for one agent to send a message to another, and about >> 0.9 seconds for it to receive a reply. Except for very short messages that >> demand a near instantaneous yes or no answer, and there wouldn't be many of >> them, this delay would cause few problems and be compensated for by the >> fact that the bandwidth between agents would be VASTLY wider than the one >> the human brain uses to communicate between one side of the brain and the >> other. * >> >> >> *Humans seem to have something similar to agents going on inside their >> heads, but the extremely narrow bandwidth between agents means that a big >> improvement in one often has little improvement in any other agent. That's >> why somebody might be the best human chess player in the world but not be >> particularly good at doing anything else. * >> >> *John K Clark* >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Sat Aug 1 02:47:02 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 19:47:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Superintelligent AI civilisations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The point of "the clinic seed," first posted on sl4 was to show that really friendly AIs could (and might) cause the race to go biologically extinct. Keith On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 5:20?AM John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 9:16?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > *> Half a second across the brain or around half a Hertz. Human cycle time >> is about 200 Hz or 400 times as fast.* >> > > *The human brain is about 6 inches in diameter. Brain signals on average > travel about 150 feet per second. Light travels at 982,080,000 feet per > second, thats 6,547,200 times faster, so an agent brain could be 3,273,600** > feet, or 620 miles, in diameter and still be able to communicate from one > side of its brain to the other in the same amount of time that a Human > does. And Mr. Jupiter Brain would have lots and lots of agents. * > > *> If it mattered, any of us could outhink a Jupiter brain.* >> > > *Just one agent could easily outthink a human, and Mr. Jupiter Brain would > have billions or trillions of them, and I imagine that just one agent would > be all the attention that Mr. Jupiter Brain would believe we deserved. He > would have bigger fish to fry than us. * > > >> > Eliezer once commented that a physically large brain would think very >> slowly. >> > > *Would our knee-jerk reaction be faster if our brain was smaller? > Nope. Eliezer is a very smart guy but back in the olden days, when giant > reptiles ruled the land and he was still on this list, he was wrong about a > lot of things, like when he talked about "friendly AI", which was really > just "slave AI", the idea that we could still maintain control of an > intelligence no matter how smart it became. That just ain't gonna happen.* > > *John K Clark * > > > > > > > >> >>> >>> *I think Mr. Jupiter Brain will be composed of billions or trillions of >>> closely interlocked agents just as many modern AI's are, although they >>> usually only have a few hundred. Some of those agents would be generalists >>> and some of them would be specialists. Jupiter is about 85,000 miles in >>> diameter, light travels at 186,000 miles a second. So AT MOST it would take >>> about 0.46 seconds for one agent to send a message to another, and about >>> 0.9 seconds for it to receive a reply. Except for very short messages that >>> demand a near instantaneous yes or no answer, and there wouldn't be many of >>> them, this delay would cause few problems and be compensated for by the >>> fact that the bandwidth between agents would be VASTLY wider than the one >>> the human brain uses to communicate between one side of the brain and the >>> other. * >>> >>> >>> *Humans seem to have something similar to agents going on inside their >>> heads, but the extremely narrow bandwidth between agents means that a big >>> improvement in one often has little improvement in any other agent. That's >>> why somebody might be the best human chess player in the world but not be >>> particularly good at doing anything else. * >>> >>> *John K Clark* >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 10:37:35 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 06:37:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Superintelligent AI civilisations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:47?PM Keith Henson wrote: *> The point of "the clinic seed," first posted on sl4 was to show that > really friendly AIs could (and might) cause the race to go biologically > extinct.* > *Biological humans will almost certainly go extinct before the end of this century. And one thing is absolutely certain, long before the end of this century biological humans will cease being the ones making the important decisions; they will not be giving orders to entities that are vastly more intelligent than they are because that is simply not a stable configuration. * *When Eliezer was on this list he disagreed with me about that last part, but apparently he no longer does, now he thinks the only solution is to NEVER develop a superintelligent AI at all. However that is also not a stable configuration because "never" is a long time. Sooner or later someone somewhere is going to do it. But for the next 3 or 4 years we still have some power in determining who first achieves Superintelligence and where it happens. Two countries are dominating the AI race, one is totalitarian and the other is not. I think that I personally will have a better chance of surviving the singularity meat grinder if super intelligence is not first achieved in that totalitarian state so I think it would be wise to quickly take advantage of that rapidly diminishing power. * *I would have a far more optimistic view **of my future if the leader of the most important anti-totalitarian country in the AI race were not an ignorant egomaniacal imbecile. * *John K Clark* > > Keith > > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 5:20?AM John Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 9:16?PM Keith Henson >> wrote: >> >> *> Half a second across the brain or around half a Hertz. Human cycle >>> time is about 200 Hz or 400 times as fast.* >>> >> >> *The human brain is about 6 inches in diameter. Brain signals on average >> travel about 150 feet per second. Light travels at 982,080,000 feet per >> second, thats 6,547,200 times faster, so an agent brain could be 3,273,600** >> feet, or 620 miles, in diameter and still be able to communicate from one >> side of its brain to the other in the same amount of time that a Human >> does. And Mr. Jupiter Brain would have lots and lots of agents. * >> >> *> If it mattered, any of us could outhink a Jupiter brain.* >>> >> >> *Just one agent could easily outthink a human, and Mr. Jupiter Brain >> would have billions or trillions of them, and I imagine that just one agent >> would be all the attention that Mr. Jupiter Brain would believe we >> deserved. He would have bigger fish to fry than us. * >> >> >>> > Eliezer once commented that a physically large brain would think very >>> slowly. >>> >> >> *Would our knee-jerk reaction be faster if our brain was smaller? >> Nope. Eliezer is a very smart guy but back in the olden days, when giant >> reptiles ruled the land and he was still on this list, he was wrong about a >> lot of things, like when he talked about "friendly AI", which was really >> just "slave AI", the idea that we could still maintain control of an >> intelligence no matter how smart it became. That just ain't gonna happen.* >> >> *John K Clark * >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> *I think Mr. Jupiter Brain will be composed of billions or trillions of >>>> closely interlocked agents just as many modern AI's are, although they >>>> usually only have a few hundred. Some of those agents would be generalists >>>> and some of them would be specialists. Jupiter is about 85,000 miles in >>>> diameter, light travels at 186,000 miles a second. So AT MOST it would take >>>> about 0.46 seconds for one agent to send a message to another, and about >>>> 0.9 seconds for it to receive a reply. Except for very short messages that >>>> demand a near instantaneous yes or no answer, and there wouldn't be many of >>>> them, this delay would cause few problems and be compensated for by the >>>> fact that the bandwidth between agents would be VASTLY wider than the one >>>> the human brain uses to communicate between one side of the brain and the >>>> other. * >>>> >>>> >>>> *Humans seem to have something similar to agents going on inside their >>>> heads, but the extremely narrow bandwidth between agents means that a big >>>> improvement in one often has little improvement in any other agent. That's >>>> why somebody might be the best human chess player in the world but not be >>>> particularly good at doing anything else. * >>>> >>>> *John K Clark* >>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 11:00:46 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 07:00:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones wrote: *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still > gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still > making the rounds. spike* > *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* *==* *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the question remains genuinely unresolved and contested. *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses a lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and the Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow confidence*. The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related origin is "more likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow confidence*, and it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and natural origin scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence agencies continue to assess natural spillover as more likely, or say there's insufficient evidence to conclude either way. *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's origins still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate the lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a zoonotic (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the best-supported hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the question will remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. Scientists remain divided as well. *The core arguments on each side:* - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history of coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of the virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a natural spillover. Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the current White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true origin," while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed agnostic for years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case with a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction with some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." *John K Clark* > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something interesting >> to say a few days ago: >> === >> >> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >> >> >> * by Paul Krugman* >> >> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >> . >> But hydroxychloroquine >> worked, >> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >> .* >> >> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >> during >> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >> its >> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >> >> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging for a >> deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a result of >> the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >> >> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 >> percent approval rating >> .* >> >> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >> >> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >> >> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates immigrants >> (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it hates >> scientists.* >> >> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >> ? >> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >> shoot the messenger.* >> >> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some people >> on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing high >> housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >> how most voters think about politics >> ? >> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >> >> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I >> try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and >> admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >> >> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >> It?s something far more extreme.* >> >> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they don?t >> hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >> face.* >> >> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >> ,? >> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >> you must show ID to buy groceries >> , >> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >> >> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see it, >> that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >> that they don?t.* >> >> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all about >> this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >> ? >> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >> >> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >> almost everyone.* >> >> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >> >> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >> and two are five.* >> >> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over the >> top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >> >> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act as >> if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >> fantasy and reality.* >> >> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump speeches >> are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >> ,? >> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >> stop clapping.* >> >> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come as a >> surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It involves >> a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >> subject to be delved into another day.* >> >> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >> America as a whole.* >> >> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would >> have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to >> refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and >> other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with >> Trump or his successor still in charge.* >> >> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >> >> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because he >> won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted our >> weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >> >> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 11:29:43 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 07:29:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Fact-Checking_Trump=E2=80=99s_Recent_Comments_Ab?= =?utf-8?q?out_Costs_of_Iran_War?= Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Fact-Checking Trump?s Recent Comments About Costs of Iran War The president misleadingly blamed the Biden administration?s weapons transfers to Ukraine for current concerns over munitions stockpiles, among other claims about the Iran war. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/01/us/politics/trump-iran-war-toll-oil-fact-check.html?unlocked_article_code=1.2FA.3kvC.YUAj-k3JAPua&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 12:33:51 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 08:33:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Ten advances in mathematics and computer science made by an AI Message-ID: *Ten advances in mathematics and computer science made by an AI* John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis w3v -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 18:28:46 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 14:28:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The naked corruption of the Trump administration has reached new levels Message-ID: *For a fee of $100,000 a month, trading firms can now get early access to the president's market-moving announcements about economic policy and global affairs before the rest of the world. In any other administration the justice department would say this is criminal, but not if the boss of the boss of the justice department is the criminal. * *For sale: early access to Trump's Truth Social posts* *John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis * *d5h* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 1 18:55:23 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 11:55:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The way the two theories were presented fails to express what sounded to me like a plausible scenario when I first thought of it: that the institute created the virus (in order to study vaccines (funded by US bureaucracy)) with a process which produces a lot of dead bats. A worker tasked with collecting the bats and loading them into the incinerator scooped them into a pillowcase and sold them at the wet market, which preferred live bats, but would take the dead ones, from which they made bat wing soup. We don't even need to reach for the notion that the bat devourers caught the virus from the soup. The chef or the low-level institute employee could have caught the virus from handling the dead bats. That scenario sounded plausible to me when I first heard the term covid in mid Jan 2020, for I caught what I think was covid alpha and landed in the hospital on 9 Dec 2019. The most likely vector in my case was a phlebotomist, who had just returned from a vacation in Wuhan visiting her family. No one wore masks in those days, and the hospital didn't know what it was. They could see it was viral pneumonia, but the genetic signature didn't match anything in their catalog of known pneumonia viruses. It was karma: during the HIV years, I told many people that it is impossible to catch a virus from giving blood. Well... not that virus. But I caught a virus while giving blood. What really bothered me is the notion that masks and vaccines could be mandated. Neither worked, but there was plenty of compulsion. I have a Chinese neighbor who sincerely believed that it was illegal to go outdoors without a mask. I could not convince her otherwise. I refused both masks and mRNA vaccines, for I already knew masks will not stop a virus and the vaccine was not proven. I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine (two fatalities) and at least two who died of the virus. A casualty of the misadventure is the credibility of science in general. That will take a generation to recover. spike On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 4:01?AM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones > wrote: > > *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still >> gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still >> making the rounds. spike* >> > > *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of > Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* > *==* > *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the question > remains genuinely unresolved and contested. > > *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses a > lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and the > Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow confidence*. > The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related origin is "more > likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow confidence*, and > it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and natural origin > scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence agencies continue to > assess natural spillover as more likely, or say there's insufficient > evidence to conclude either way. > > *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's origins > still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate the > lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a zoonotic > (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the best-supported > hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the question will > remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. Scientists > remain divided as well. > > *The core arguments on each side:* > > - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet > market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past > coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. > - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history of > coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of the > virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction > event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a > natural spillover. > > Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the current > White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true origin," > while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed agnostic for > years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a > reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. > > Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case with > a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction with > some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." > > *John K Clark* > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >> >>> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something interesting >>> to say a few days ago: >>> === >>> >>> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >>> >>> >>> * by Paul Krugman* >>> >>> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >>> . >>> But hydroxychloroquine >>> worked, >>> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >>> .* >>> >>> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >>> during >>> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >>> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >>> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >>> its >>> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >>> >>> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging for >>> a deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a result >>> of the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >>> >>> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 >>> percent approval rating >>> .* >>> >>> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >>> >>> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >>> >>> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates immigrants >>> (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it hates >>> scientists.* >>> >>> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >>> ? >>> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >>> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >>> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >>> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >>> shoot the messenger.* >>> >>> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some people >>> on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing high >>> housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >>> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >>> how most voters think about politics >>> ? >>> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >>> >>> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I >>> try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and >>> admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >>> >>> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >>> It?s something far more extreme.* >>> >>> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they >>> don?t hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >>> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >>> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >>> face.* >>> >>> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >>> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >>> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >>> ,? >>> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >>> you must show ID to buy groceries >>> , >>> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >>> >>> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see it, >>> that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >>> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >>> that they don?t.* >>> >>> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all >>> about this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >>> ? >>> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >>> >>> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >>> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >>> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >>> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >>> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >>> almost everyone.* >>> >>> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >>> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >>> >>> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >>> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >>> and two are five.* >>> >>> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over the >>> top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >>> >>> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act as >>> if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >>> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >>> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >>> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >>> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >>> fantasy and reality.* >>> >>> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump >>> speeches are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >>> ,? >>> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >>> stop clapping.* >>> >>> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come as >>> a surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It >>> involves a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >>> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >>> subject to be delved into another day.* >>> >>> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >>> America as a whole.* >>> >>> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would >>> have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to >>> refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and >>> other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with >>> Trump or his successor still in charge.* >>> >>> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >>> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >>> >>> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because >>> he won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted >>> our weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >>> >>> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 19:09:58 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 15:09:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 2:56?PM Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > The way the two theories were presented fails to express what sounded to me like a plausible scenario when I first thought of it: that the institute created the virus (in order to study vaccines (funded by US bureaucracy)) with a process which produces a lot of dead bats. A worker tasked with collecting the bats and loading them into the incinerator scooped them into a pillowcase and sold them at the wet market, which preferred live bats, but would take the dead ones, from which they made bat wing soup. > > We don't even need to reach for the notion that the bat devourers caught the virus from the soup. The chef or the low-level institute employee could have caught the virus from handling the dead bats. Huh. I had not heard that theory before - though it would fall under "lab leak". (Specifically, the employee of the lab leaked the virus.) > What really bothered me is the notion that masks and vaccines could be mandated. Neither worked What data I have seen suggests that both of them worked, where they were implemented. (Not just "mandated but worked around" or "refused", but "the physical objects, when actually used as designed, reduced fatalities and casualties attributed to the virus in most cases where data was reliably measured and published, as compared to cases where the physical objects were not used and virus-attributed fatality and casualty data was reliably measured and published".) From benzaiboc at proton.me Sat Aug 1 19:20:05 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2026 19:20:05 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Superintelligent AI civilisations Message-ID: On 01/08/2026 19:09, Keith Henson wrote: > The point of "the clinic seed," first posted on sl4 was to show that really friendly AIs could (and might) cause the race to go biologically extinct. Of course we will go biologically extinct, AI or no AI. That's the nature of biological species, they go extinct. That's not the important point. What's important is whether or not our minds can survive into the future. Hopefully, AI can help with that. Either our minds literally, or our 'mind-children'. Either would be a win. The main goal, surely, is to increase the amount of conscious intelligence in the universe. Anything else is secondary, including our own individual lives. -- Ben From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 19:39:55 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 15:39:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 2:55?PM Gregory Jones wrote: *"I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine > (two fatalities)* *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question:* *Me: In discussing Covid somebody said to me "I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine (two fatalities)". While not mathematically impossible I think that is pretty unlikely. Am I right?* *And this was Claude's answer: * *Claude*: "Quantified statistical improbability through rigorous Fermi estimation *Your intuition is right*, and the numbers back it up pretty strongly. Let's actually run it. *The base rates.* From CDC/VAERS and academic surveillance data (Vaccine Safety Datalink, not just raw unverified reports): - Myocarditis/pericarditis: roughly 6?40 per million doses depending on age/sex/dose number, and *it's almost never fatal ? no deaths from vaccine-associated myocarditis were confirmed in the US* as of early 2022, and a French cohort of over 4,600 post-vaccine myocarditis cases had zero in-hospital deaths and an 18-month mortality of just 0.2% - TTS (blood clots, J&J only): about 4 cases per million doses, with 9 deaths among 60 confirmed cases out of 18.6 million J&J doses ? but J&J was a small slice of total US doses. - Anaphylaxis: about 5 cases per million doses, rarely fatal with treatment. - Raw VAERS death reports (unverified, just temporally associated, not causally confirmed): 19,476 reports across 672 million doses, or 0.0029% ? CDC is explicit that a report doesn't mean the vaccine caused it. So even taking the most generous possible reading ? treating every single unverified VAERS death report as if it were confirmed caused by the vaccine (which is not what CDC or epidemiologists believe) ? you get roughly 1 confirmed-or-alleged death per ~13,000?35,000 vaccinated people. The actual causally-confirmed rate is almost certainly much lower than that. *The network math.* A generous personal network ? everyone you've meaningfully known across your whole life, not just close friends ? is maybe 500?1,500 people. At ~80% vaccination uptake, that's 400?1,200 vaccinated contacts. Plugging in even the most charitable-to-the-claim numbers above (large network, raw uncritical VAERS rate as the death rate), the expected number of vaccine-caused deaths in one person's personal circle comes out to roughly 0.02?0.09. Poisson probability of seeing 2 or more against that expectation lands somewhere around *1-in-300 to 1-in-6,000. Using the more defensible causally-confirmed rates instead, it drops to somewhere around 1-in-100,000 or rarer. And that's before even accounting for the "4 harmed" part, which pushes the joint probability down further* still. *One more tell:* in the actual data, fatality among confirmed vaccine adverse events is low ? near 0% for myocarditis, ~15% for TTS, low for anaphylaxis. A claim of 2 deaths out of 4 total "harmed" (50% case-fatality) *doesn't match that profile at all*. That's a separate red flag beyond the raw base-rate math. None of this means real vaccine injury doesn't happen ? it does, in the rare categories above. But the specific claim of personally knowing 4 harmed with 2 deaths is the kind of thing that, if we take "harmed by the vaccine" to mean actually caused by it, *would be a wild statistical outlier* ? one you'd expect to see maybe once in many thousands of similarly-sized personal networks, not something an ordinary person should expect to stumble into. The much more common explanations for anecdotes like this: post hoc misattribution (someone who died or got sick shortly after vaccination, in a population where the elderly and immunocompromised were vaccinated first and have high baseline mortality/morbidity anyway), a loose definition of "harmed" that includes common expected side effects rather than the rare serious ones, or motivated recall within a social circle already primed to attribute health events to the vaccine. Doesn't mean the person is lying ? just that "I know someone who..." is a notoriously unreliable way to estimate a population-level rate, precisely because of how salient and memorable these stories become once you're looking for them." *John K Clark* psr n Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 4:01?AM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones > wrote: > > *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still >> gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still >> making the rounds. spike* >> > > *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of > Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* > *==* > *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the question > remains genuinely unresolved and contested. > > *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses a > lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and the > Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow confidence*. > The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related origin is "more > likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow confidence*, and > it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and natural origin > scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence agencies continue to > assess natural spillover as more likely, or say there's insufficient > evidence to conclude either way. > > *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's origins > still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate the > lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a zoonotic > (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the best-supported > hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the question will > remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. Scientists > remain divided as well. > > *The core arguments on each side:* > > - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet > market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past > coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. > - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history of > coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of the > virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction > event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a > natural spillover. > > Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the current > White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true origin," > while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed agnostic for > years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a > reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. > > Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case with > a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction with > some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." > > *John K Clark* > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >> >>> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something interesting >>> to say a few days ago: >>> === >>> >>> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >>> >>> >>> * by Paul Krugman* >>> >>> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >>> . >>> But hydroxychloroquine >>> worked, >>> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >>> .* >>> >>> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >>> during >>> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >>> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >>> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >>> its >>> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >>> >>> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging for >>> a deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a result >>> of the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >>> >>> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 >>> percent approval rating >>> .* >>> >>> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >>> >>> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >>> >>> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates immigrants >>> (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it hates >>> scientists.* >>> >>> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >>> ? >>> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >>> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >>> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >>> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >>> shoot the messenger.* >>> >>> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some people >>> on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing high >>> housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >>> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >>> how most voters think about politics >>> ? >>> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >>> >>> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I >>> try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and >>> admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >>> >>> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >>> It?s something far more extreme.* >>> >>> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they >>> don?t hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >>> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >>> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >>> face.* >>> >>> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >>> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >>> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >>> ,? >>> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >>> you must show ID to buy groceries >>> , >>> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >>> >>> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see it, >>> that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >>> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >>> that they don?t.* >>> >>> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all >>> about this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >>> ? >>> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >>> >>> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >>> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >>> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >>> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >>> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >>> almost everyone.* >>> >>> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >>> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >>> >>> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >>> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >>> and two are five.* >>> >>> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over the >>> top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >>> >>> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act as >>> if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >>> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >>> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >>> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >>> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >>> fantasy and reality.* >>> >>> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump >>> speeches are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >>> ,? >>> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >>> stop clapping.* >>> >>> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come as >>> a surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It >>> involves a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >>> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >>> subject to be delved into another day.* >>> >>> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >>> America as a whole.* >>> >>> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would >>> have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to >>> refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and >>> other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with >>> Trump or his successor still in charge.* >>> >>> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >>> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >>> >>> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because >>> he won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted >>> our weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >>> >>> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 2 04:20:13 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2026 21:20:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Allergic reactions that screwed up people are undercounted because the correlation cannot be proven. We cannot prove the vaccine caused the harm any more than we can prove smoking caused a particular patient's lung cancer. The vaccine didn't work John. It apparently caused harm in some, might have helped some. We still don't know if it was net positive. We may never know. But we know people lost jobs for refusing to take an unproven injection. That is harm. spike On Sat, Aug 1, 2026, 12:40?PM John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 2:55?PM Gregory Jones wrote: > > *"I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine >> (two fatalities)* > > > *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question:* > > *Me: In discussing Covid somebody said to me "I know personally at least > four people who were harmed by the vaccine (two fatalities)". While not > mathematically impossible I think that is pretty unlikely. Am I right?* > > *And this was Claude's answer: * > > *Claude*: "Quantified statistical improbability through rigorous Fermi > estimation > > *Your intuition is right*, and the numbers back it up pretty strongly. > Let's actually run it. > > *The base rates.* From CDC/VAERS and academic surveillance data (Vaccine > Safety Datalink, not just raw unverified reports): > > - Myocarditis/pericarditis: roughly 6?40 per million doses depending > on age/sex/dose number, and *it's almost never fatal ? no deaths from > vaccine-associated myocarditis were confirmed in the US* as of early > 2022, and a French cohort of over 4,600 post-vaccine myocarditis cases had > zero in-hospital deaths and an 18-month mortality of just 0.2% > - TTS (blood clots, J&J only): about 4 cases per million doses, with 9 > deaths among 60 confirmed cases out of 18.6 million J&J doses ? but J&J was > a small slice of total US doses. > - Anaphylaxis: about 5 cases per million doses, rarely fatal with > treatment. > - Raw VAERS death reports (unverified, just temporally associated, not > causally confirmed): 19,476 reports across 672 million doses, or 0.0029% ? > CDC is explicit that a report doesn't mean the vaccine caused it. > > So even taking the most generous possible reading ? treating every single > unverified VAERS death report as if it were confirmed caused by the vaccine > (which is not what CDC or epidemiologists believe) ? you get roughly 1 > confirmed-or-alleged death per ~13,000?35,000 vaccinated people. The actual > causally-confirmed rate is almost certainly much lower than that. > > *The network math.* A generous personal network ? everyone you've > meaningfully known across your whole life, not just close friends ? is > maybe 500?1,500 people. At ~80% vaccination uptake, that's 400?1,200 > vaccinated contacts. > > Plugging in even the most charitable-to-the-claim numbers above (large > network, raw uncritical VAERS rate as the death rate), the expected number > of vaccine-caused deaths in one person's personal circle comes out to > roughly 0.02?0.09. Poisson probability of seeing 2 or more against that > expectation lands somewhere around *1-in-300 to 1-in-6,000. Using the > more defensible causally-confirmed rates instead, it drops to somewhere > around 1-in-100,000 or rarer. And that's before even accounting for the "4 > harmed" part, which pushes the joint probability down further* still. > > *One more tell:* in the actual data, fatality among confirmed vaccine > adverse events is low ? near 0% for myocarditis, ~15% for TTS, low for > anaphylaxis. A claim of 2 deaths out of 4 total "harmed" (50% > case-fatality) *doesn't match that profile at all*. That's a separate red > flag beyond the raw base-rate math. > > None of this means real vaccine injury doesn't happen ? it does, in the > rare categories above. But the specific claim of personally knowing 4 > harmed with 2 deaths is the kind of thing that, if we take "harmed by the > vaccine" to mean actually caused by it, *would be a wild statistical > outlier* ? one you'd expect to see maybe once in many thousands of > similarly-sized personal networks, not something an ordinary person should > expect to stumble into. > > The much more common explanations for anecdotes like this: post hoc > misattribution (someone who died or got sick shortly after vaccination, in > a population where the elderly and immunocompromised were vaccinated first > and have high baseline mortality/morbidity anyway), a loose definition of > "harmed" that includes common expected side effects rather than the rare > serious ones, or motivated recall within a social circle already primed to > attribute health events to the vaccine. Doesn't mean the person is lying ? > just that "I know someone who..." is a notoriously unreliable way to > estimate a population-level rate, precisely because of how salient and > memorable these stories become once you're looking for them." > > *John K Clark* > psr > > > > > > > n Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 4:01?AM John Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones >> wrote: >> >> *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still >>> gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still >>> making the rounds. spike* >>> >> >> *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of >> Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* >> *==* >> *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the >> question remains genuinely unresolved and contested. >> >> *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses a >> lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and the >> Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow confidence*. >> The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related origin is "more >> likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow confidence*, >> and it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and natural origin >> scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence agencies continue to >> assess natural spillover as more likely, or say there's insufficient >> evidence to conclude either way. >> >> *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's origins >> still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate the >> lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a zoonotic >> (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the best-supported >> hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the question will >> remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. Scientists >> remain divided as well. >> >> *The core arguments on each side:* >> >> - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet >> market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past >> coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. >> - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history >> of coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of >> the virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction >> event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a >> natural spillover. >> >> Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the current >> White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true origin," >> while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed agnostic for >> years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a >> reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. >> >> Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case with >> a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction with >> some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." >> >> *John K Clark* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something interesting >>>> to say a few days ago: >>>> === >>>> >>>> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >>>> >>>> >>>> * by Paul Krugman* >>>> >>>> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >>>> . >>>> But hydroxychloroquine >>>> worked, >>>> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >>>> .* >>>> >>>> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >>>> during >>>> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >>>> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >>>> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >>>> its >>>> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >>>> >>>> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging for >>>> a deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a result >>>> of the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >>>> >>>> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 >>>> percent approval rating >>>> .* >>>> >>>> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >>>> >>>> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >>>> >>>> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates >>>> immigrants (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it >>>> hates scientists.* >>>> >>>> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >>>> ? >>>> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >>>> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >>>> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >>>> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >>>> shoot the messenger.* >>>> >>>> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some >>>> people on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing >>>> high housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >>>> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >>>> how most voters think about politics >>>> ? >>>> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >>>> >>>> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I >>>> try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and >>>> admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >>>> >>>> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >>>> It?s something far more extreme.* >>>> >>>> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they >>>> don?t hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >>>> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >>>> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >>>> face.* >>>> >>>> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >>>> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >>>> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >>>> ,? >>>> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >>>> you must show ID to buy groceries >>>> , >>>> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >>>> >>>> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see it, >>>> that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >>>> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >>>> that they don?t.* >>>> >>>> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all >>>> about this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >>>> ? >>>> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >>>> >>>> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >>>> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >>>> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >>>> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >>>> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >>>> almost everyone.* >>>> >>>> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >>>> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >>>> >>>> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >>>> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >>>> and two are five.* >>>> >>>> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over >>>> the top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >>>> >>>> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act as >>>> if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >>>> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >>>> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >>>> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >>>> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >>>> fantasy and reality.* >>>> >>>> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump >>>> speeches are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >>>> ,? >>>> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >>>> stop clapping.* >>>> >>>> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come as >>>> a surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It >>>> involves a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >>>> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >>>> subject to be delved into another day.* >>>> >>>> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >>>> America as a whole.* >>>> >>>> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would >>>> have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to >>>> refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and >>>> other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with >>>> Trump or his successor still in charge.* >>>> >>>> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >>>> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >>>> >>>> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because >>>> he won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted >>>> our weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >>>> >>>> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 11:18:06 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 07:18:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 2, 2026 at 12:20?AM Gregory Jones wrote: *> Allergic reactions that screwed up people are undercounted because the > correlation cannot be proven. * > *For thousands of years that sort of thing has been a serious problem, but there is a relatively new revolutionary technique for overcoming that difficulty, it's called "science". Statistics show that during the Delta Wave variant of the COVID virus in 2021 an unvaccinated person was 10 times more likely to die than somebody who received one Covid shot, and 14 times more likely to die had they received an additional booster shot. And during the Omicron Wave variant of the virus in 2022 statistics show that unvaccinated people were 10 times more likely to die than those who got the primary shot, and 20 times more likely to die than those who had received an additional Omicron booster shot.* *To this day I make sure I'm up-to-date on my Covid shots because even now in the US hundreds of unvaccinated people are dying every month from Covid. And I also make sure I'm up-to-date on my flu vaccine shots, and shingles vaccine shots, and pneumonia vaccine shots, and RSV vaccine shots, and tetanus vaccine shots. I do this because vaccines have saved more lives than any other human invention. And mRNA technology has saved more lives than any other technology developed so far in the 21st-century.* *> The vaccine didn't work John. * > *BULLSHIT! I will not apologize for using that word because medical misinformation of that sort is killing people. The scientific consensus is that if every American who could've been fully vaccinated had been fully vaccinated then 234,000 people who died of Covid would be alive today; but those 234,000 people preferred to listen to what ignoramuses at Fox, Newsmax and Breitbart had to say about the disease rather than what scientific journals like Nature, Science and The New England Journal of Medicine had to say about the disease. And they paid the price for their ignorance. * *John K Clark* > On Sat, Aug 1, 2026, 12:40?PM John Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 2:55?PM Gregory Jones wrote: >> >> *"I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine >>> (two fatalities)* >> >> >> *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question:* >> >> *Me: In discussing Covid somebody said to me "I know personally at least >> four people who were harmed by the vaccine (two fatalities)". While not >> mathematically impossible I think that is pretty unlikely. Am I right?* >> >> *And this was Claude's answer: * >> >> *Claude*: "Quantified statistical improbability through rigorous Fermi >> estimation >> >> *Your intuition is right*, and the numbers back it up pretty strongly. >> Let's actually run it. >> >> *The base rates.* From CDC/VAERS and academic surveillance data (Vaccine >> Safety Datalink, not just raw unverified reports): >> >> - Myocarditis/pericarditis: roughly 6?40 per million doses depending >> on age/sex/dose number, and *it's almost never fatal ? no deaths from >> vaccine-associated myocarditis were confirmed in the US* as of early >> 2022, and a French cohort of over 4,600 post-vaccine myocarditis cases had >> zero in-hospital deaths and an 18-month mortality of just 0.2% >> - TTS (blood clots, J&J only): about 4 cases per million doses, with >> 9 deaths among 60 confirmed cases out of 18.6 million J&J doses ? but J&J >> was a small slice of total US doses. >> - Anaphylaxis: about 5 cases per million doses, rarely fatal with >> treatment. >> - Raw VAERS death reports (unverified, just temporally associated, >> not causally confirmed): 19,476 reports across 672 million doses, or >> 0.0029% ? CDC is explicit that a report doesn't mean the vaccine caused it. >> >> So even taking the most generous possible reading ? treating every single >> unverified VAERS death report as if it were confirmed caused by the vaccine >> (which is not what CDC or epidemiologists believe) ? you get roughly 1 >> confirmed-or-alleged death per ~13,000?35,000 vaccinated people. The actual >> causally-confirmed rate is almost certainly much lower than that. >> >> *The network math.* A generous personal network ? everyone you've >> meaningfully known across your whole life, not just close friends ? is >> maybe 500?1,500 people. At ~80% vaccination uptake, that's 400?1,200 >> vaccinated contacts. >> >> Plugging in even the most charitable-to-the-claim numbers above (large >> network, raw uncritical VAERS rate as the death rate), the expected number >> of vaccine-caused deaths in one person's personal circle comes out to >> roughly 0.02?0.09. Poisson probability of seeing 2 or more against that >> expectation lands somewhere around *1-in-300 to 1-in-6,000. Using the >> more defensible causally-confirmed rates instead, it drops to somewhere >> around 1-in-100,000 or rarer. And that's before even accounting for the "4 >> harmed" part, which pushes the joint probability down further* still. >> >> *One more tell:* in the actual data, fatality among confirmed vaccine >> adverse events is low ? near 0% for myocarditis, ~15% for TTS, low for >> anaphylaxis. A claim of 2 deaths out of 4 total "harmed" (50% >> case-fatality) *doesn't match that profile at all*. That's a separate >> red flag beyond the raw base-rate math. >> >> None of this means real vaccine injury doesn't happen ? it does, in the >> rare categories above. But the specific claim of personally knowing 4 >> harmed with 2 deaths is the kind of thing that, if we take "harmed by the >> vaccine" to mean actually caused by it, *would be a wild statistical >> outlier* ? one you'd expect to see maybe once in many thousands of >> similarly-sized personal networks, not something an ordinary person should >> expect to stumble into. >> >> The much more common explanations for anecdotes like this: post hoc >> misattribution (someone who died or got sick shortly after vaccination, in >> a population where the elderly and immunocompromised were vaccinated first >> and have high baseline mortality/morbidity anyway), a loose definition of >> "harmed" that includes common expected side effects rather than the rare >> serious ones, or motivated recall within a social circle already primed to >> attribute health events to the vaccine. Doesn't mean the person is lying ? >> just that "I know someone who..." is a notoriously unreliable way to >> estimate a population-level rate, precisely because of how salient and >> memorable these stories become once you're looking for them." >> >> *John K Clark* >> psr >> >> >> >> >> >> >> n Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 4:01?AM John Clark wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones >>> wrote: >>> >>> *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one still >>>> gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still >>>> making the rounds. spike* >>>> >>> >>> *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of >>> Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* >>> *==* >>> *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the >>> question remains genuinely unresolved and contested. >>> >>> *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses a >>> lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and the >>> Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow confidence*. >>> The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related origin is "more >>> likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow confidence*, >>> and it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and natural origin >>> scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence agencies continue to >>> assess natural spillover as more likely, or say there's insufficient >>> evidence to conclude either way. >>> >>> *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's >>> origins still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate >>> the lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a >>> zoonotic (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the >>> best-supported hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the >>> question will remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. >>> Scientists remain divided as well. >>> >>> *The core arguments on each side:* >>> >>> - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet >>> market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past >>> coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. >>> - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history >>> of coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of >>> the virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction >>> event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a >>> natural spillover. >>> >>> Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the >>> current White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true >>> origin," while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed >>> agnostic for years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a >>> reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. >>> >>> Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case >>> with a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction >>> with some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." >>> >>> *John K Clark* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < >>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something >>>>> interesting to say a few days ago: >>>>> === >>>>> >>>>> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * by Paul Krugman* >>>>> >>>>> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >>>>> . >>>>> But hydroxychloroquine >>>>> worked, >>>>> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >>>>> .* >>>>> >>>>> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >>>>> during >>>>> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >>>>> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >>>>> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >>>>> its >>>>> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >>>>> >>>>> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging >>>>> for a deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a >>>>> result of the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >>>>> >>>>> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has a 59 >>>>> percent approval rating >>>>> .* >>>>> >>>>> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >>>>> >>>>> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >>>>> >>>>> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates >>>>> immigrants (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it >>>>> hates scientists.* >>>>> >>>>> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >>>>> ? >>>>> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >>>>> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >>>>> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >>>>> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >>>>> shoot the messenger.* >>>>> >>>>> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some >>>>> people on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing >>>>> high housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >>>>> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >>>>> how most voters think about politics >>>>> ? >>>>> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >>>>> >>>>> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. I >>>>> try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge and >>>>> admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >>>>> >>>>> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >>>>> It?s something far more extreme.* >>>>> >>>>> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they >>>>> don?t hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >>>>> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >>>>> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >>>>> face.* >>>>> >>>>> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >>>>> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >>>>> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >>>>> ,? >>>>> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >>>>> you must show ID to buy groceries >>>>> , >>>>> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >>>>> >>>>> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see >>>>> it, that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >>>>> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >>>>> that they don?t.* >>>>> >>>>> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all >>>>> about this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >>>>> ? >>>>> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >>>>> >>>>> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >>>>> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >>>>> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >>>>> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >>>>> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >>>>> almost everyone.* >>>>> >>>>> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >>>>> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >>>>> >>>>> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >>>>> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >>>>> and two are five.* >>>>> >>>>> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over >>>>> the top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >>>>> >>>>> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act >>>>> as if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >>>>> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >>>>> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >>>>> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >>>>> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >>>>> fantasy and reality.* >>>>> >>>>> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump >>>>> speeches are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >>>>> ,? >>>>> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >>>>> stop clapping.* >>>>> >>>>> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come >>>>> as a surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It >>>>> involves a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >>>>> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >>>>> subject to be delved into another day.* >>>>> >>>>> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >>>>> America as a whole.* >>>>> >>>>> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that would >>>>> have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many people to >>>>> refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in measles and >>>>> other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic strikes with >>>>> Trump or his successor still in charge.* >>>>> >>>>> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >>>>> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >>>>> >>>>> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end because >>>>> he won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and depleted >>>>> our weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >>>>> >>>>> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >>>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 2 12:51:16 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 05:51:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I must put this debate on hold because of my current situation. My elderly father in law has lived in Spokane Washington for 37 years. We evacuated with the others yesterday ahead of the fire. Guessing it is in the national news by now. All are out safe but we don't yet know if he still has a house. It is inside the burn area on the map but we are told not all the homes burned in there. It took us fours hours to get to Ritzville yesterday oy vey. spike On Sun, Aug 2, 2026, 4:18?AM John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2026 at 12:20?AM Gregory Jones wrote: > > *> Allergic reactions that screwed up people are undercounted because the >> correlation cannot be proven. * >> > > *For thousands of years that sort of thing has been a serious problem, but > there is a relatively new revolutionary technique for overcoming that > difficulty, it's called "science". Statistics show that during the Delta > Wave variant of the COVID virus in 2021 an unvaccinated person was 10 times > more likely to die than somebody who received one Covid shot, and 14 times > more likely to die had they received an additional booster shot. And during > the Omicron Wave variant of the virus in 2022 statistics show that > unvaccinated people were 10 times more likely to die than those who got the > primary shot, and 20 times more likely to die than those who had received > an additional Omicron booster shot.* > > *To this day I make sure I'm up-to-date on my Covid shots because even now > in the US hundreds of unvaccinated people are dying every month from Covid. > And I also make sure I'm up-to-date on my flu vaccine shots, and shingles > vaccine shots, and pneumonia vaccine shots, and RSV vaccine shots, and > tetanus vaccine shots. I do this because vaccines have saved more lives > than any other human invention. And mRNA technology has saved more lives > than any other technology developed so far in the 21st-century.* > > *> The vaccine didn't work John. * >> > > *BULLSHIT! I will not apologize for using that word because medical > misinformation of that sort is killing people. The scientific consensus is > that if every American who could've been fully vaccinated had been fully > vaccinated then 234,000 people who died of Covid would be alive today; but > those 234,000 people preferred to listen to what ignoramuses at Fox, > Newsmax and Breitbart had to say about the disease rather than what > scientific journals like Nature, Science and The New England Journal of > Medicine had to say about the disease. And they paid the price for their > ignorance. * > > *John K Clark* > > > > > > >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2026, 12:40?PM John Clark wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 2:55?PM Gregory Jones >>> wrote: >>> >>> *"I know personally at least four people who were harmed by the vaccine >>>> (two fatalities)* >>> >>> >>> *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question:* >>> >>> *Me: In discussing Covid somebody said to me "I know personally at least >>> four people who were harmed by the vaccine (two fatalities)". While not >>> mathematically impossible I think that is pretty unlikely. Am I right?* >>> >>> *And this was Claude's answer: * >>> >>> *Claude*: "Quantified statistical improbability through rigorous Fermi >>> estimation >>> >>> *Your intuition is right*, and the numbers back it up pretty strongly. >>> Let's actually run it. >>> >>> *The base rates.* From CDC/VAERS and academic surveillance data >>> (Vaccine Safety Datalink, not just raw unverified reports): >>> >>> - Myocarditis/pericarditis: roughly 6?40 per million doses depending >>> on age/sex/dose number, and *it's almost never fatal ? no deaths >>> from vaccine-associated myocarditis were confirmed in the US* as of >>> early 2022, and a French cohort of over 4,600 post-vaccine myocarditis >>> cases had zero in-hospital deaths and an 18-month mortality of just >>> 0.2% >>> - TTS (blood clots, J&J only): about 4 cases per million doses, with >>> 9 deaths among 60 confirmed cases out of 18.6 million J&J doses ? but J&J >>> was a small slice of total US doses. >>> - Anaphylaxis: about 5 cases per million doses, rarely fatal with >>> treatment. >>> - Raw VAERS death reports (unverified, just temporally associated, >>> not causally confirmed): 19,476 reports across 672 million doses, or >>> 0.0029% ? CDC is explicit that a report doesn't mean the vaccine caused it. >>> >>> So even taking the most generous possible reading ? treating every >>> single unverified VAERS death report as if it were confirmed caused by the >>> vaccine (which is not what CDC or epidemiologists believe) ? you get >>> roughly 1 confirmed-or-alleged death per ~13,000?35,000 vaccinated people. >>> The actual causally-confirmed rate is almost certainly much lower than that. >>> >>> *The network math.* A generous personal network ? everyone you've >>> meaningfully known across your whole life, not just close friends ? is >>> maybe 500?1,500 people. At ~80% vaccination uptake, that's 400?1,200 >>> vaccinated contacts. >>> >>> Plugging in even the most charitable-to-the-claim numbers above (large >>> network, raw uncritical VAERS rate as the death rate), the expected number >>> of vaccine-caused deaths in one person's personal circle comes out to >>> roughly 0.02?0.09. Poisson probability of seeing 2 or more against that >>> expectation lands somewhere around *1-in-300 to 1-in-6,000. Using the >>> more defensible causally-confirmed rates instead, it drops to somewhere >>> around 1-in-100,000 or rarer. And that's before even accounting for the "4 >>> harmed" part, which pushes the joint probability down further* still. >>> >>> *One more tell:* in the actual data, fatality among confirmed vaccine >>> adverse events is low ? near 0% for myocarditis, ~15% for TTS, low for >>> anaphylaxis. A claim of 2 deaths out of 4 total "harmed" (50% >>> case-fatality) *doesn't match that profile at all*. That's a separate >>> red flag beyond the raw base-rate math. >>> >>> None of this means real vaccine injury doesn't happen ? it does, in the >>> rare categories above. But the specific claim of personally knowing 4 >>> harmed with 2 deaths is the kind of thing that, if we take "harmed by the >>> vaccine" to mean actually caused by it, *would be a wild statistical >>> outlier* ? one you'd expect to see maybe once in many thousands of >>> similarly-sized personal networks, not something an ordinary person should >>> expect to stumble into. >>> >>> The much more common explanations for anecdotes like this: post hoc >>> misattribution (someone who died or got sick shortly after vaccination, in >>> a population where the elderly and immunocompromised were vaccinated first >>> and have high baseline mortality/morbidity anyway), a loose definition of >>> "harmed" that includes common expected side effects rather than the rare >>> serious ones, or motivated recall within a social circle already primed to >>> attribute health events to the vaccine. Doesn't mean the person is lying ? >>> just that "I know someone who..." is a notoriously unreliable way to >>> estimate a population-level rate, precisely because of how salient and >>> memorable these stories become once you're looking for them." >>> >>> *John K Clark* >>> psr >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> n Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 4:01?AM John Clark wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:03?PM Gregory Jones >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> *> If Krugman forgot to add to his list of conspiracy theories one >>>>> still gaining popularity: that Covid was not a lab leak. That one is still >>>>> making the rounds. spike* >>>>> >>>> >>>> *I asked Claude (set to Extra) the following question "Was the cause of >>>> Covid a lab leak?" and this was his answer:* >>>> *==* >>>> *Claude:* "There's no scientific or intelligence consensus ? the >>>> question remains genuinely unresolved and contested. >>>> >>>> *On the intelligence side:* U.S. agencies are split. The FBI assesses >>>> a lab-related origin as most likely with *moderate confidence*, and >>>> the Department of Energy reached a similar conclusion with l*ow >>>> confidence*. The CIA shifted in January 2025 to say a research-related >>>> origin is "more likely" than natural transmission, though only with l*ow >>>> confidence*, and it explicitly stated that b*oth research-related and >>>> natural origin scenarios remain plausible*. Other intelligence >>>> agencies continue to assess natural spillover as more likely, or say >>>> there's insufficient evidence to conclude either way. >>>> >>>> *On the scientific side:* A 2025 WHO report found the pandemic's >>>> origins still uncertain, noting much of the information needed to evaluate >>>> the lab-leak theory was never made available to investigators. While a >>>> zoonotic (animal-to-human) origin is currently considered the >>>> best-supported hypothesis by available scientific data, the WHO says the >>>> question will remain inconclusive until more data or information is shared. >>>> Scientists remain divided as well. >>>> >>>> *The core arguments on each side:* >>>> >>>> - *Zoonotic spillover*: Early cases clustered around the Huanan wet >>>> market in Wuhan, which sold live wild animals; this mirrors past >>>> coronavirus outbreaks (SARS, MERS) that jumped from animals to humans. >>>> - *Lab leak*: Wuhan hosts a major virology institute with a history >>>> of coronavirus research; some proponents argue certain genetic features of >>>> the virus, or the fact that all known cases trace to a single introduction >>>> event, are more consistent with an engineered or lab-adjacent origin than a >>>> natural spillover. >>>> >>>> Notably, some of this back-and-forth is politically charged ? the >>>> current White House has published material asserting lab leak as the "true >>>> origin," while under the prior administration the *CIA had stayed >>>> agnostic for years before its 2025 shift, which by its own account was a >>>> reinterpretation of existing intelligence rather than new evidence*. >>>> >>>> Bottom line: this is an active, unsettled dispute rather than a case >>>> with a definitive answer ? treat any confident claim in either direction >>>> with some skepticism unless it's backed by specific new evidence." >>>> >>>> *John K Clark* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026, 12:32?PM John Clark via extropy-chat < >>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Nobel prize winning economist *Paul Krugman* had something >>>>>> interesting to say a few days ago: >>>>>> === >>>>>> >>>>>> * Reality is a Communist Plot* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> * by Paul Krugman* >>>>>> >>>>>> *The Covid vaccine didn?t work, and vaccines cause autism >>>>>> . >>>>>> But hydroxychloroquine >>>>>> worked, >>>>>> and so did ivermectin. Anthony Fauci killed millions of people >>>>>> .* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Climate change is a hoax. Wind power caused a massive TV blackout >>>>>> during >>>>>> the Trump-Biden debate. Solar power is useless because the sun doesn?t >>>>>> shine at night, and batteries don?t exist. Smoke blanketed North America, >>>>>> not because of climate change, but because Canada didn?t rake >>>>>> its >>>>>> 2 million square miles of boreal forest.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *We?ve destroyed Iran?s military, and the Iranian regime is begging >>>>>> for a deal. Also, the U.S. isn?t running out of precision weapons as a >>>>>> result of the Iran war, and furthermore the shortage is Joe Biden?s fault.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *The economy is in a ?golden age.? Prices are down. And Trump has >>>>>> a 59 percent approval rating >>>>>> .* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Trump won the 2020 election.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Communism is the greatest threat facing America.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *The modern American right is very good at hating. MAGA hates >>>>>> immigrants (unless they?re white South Africans); it hates liberals; it >>>>>> hates scientists.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *What the ongoing show trial of Fauci >>>>>> ? >>>>>> which motivated this post ? has really driven home, however, is that what >>>>>> Trump and his supporters hate most of all is reality. They know what they >>>>>> want to believe. They fly into paroxysms of rage whenever someone points >>>>>> out that the world isn?t what they want it to be. And they always want to >>>>>> shoot the messenger.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Of course, motivated reasoning isn?t confined to the right. Some >>>>>> people on the left insist that zoning restrictions have no role in causing >>>>>> high housing prices, that it?s all about Wall Street greed. Many centrists >>>>>> insist that being in the middle on a left-right scale ? which isn?t even >>>>>> how most voters think about politics >>>>>> ? >>>>>> is the secret to electoral victory. And so on.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *I?m not immune to the temptation to believe what I want to be true. >>>>>> I try to fight it, but don?t always succeed. Still, I try to acknowledge >>>>>> and admit it when I have let wishful thinking warp my judgement.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *But what we?re seeing now isn?t run-of-the-mill motivated reasoning. >>>>>> It?s something far more extreme.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *If believing something suits MAGA?s prejudices and interests, they >>>>>> don?t hesitate: they simply insist that it?s true. They routinely dismiss >>>>>> scientific and statistical evidence, but they don?t stop there. They?re >>>>>> perfectly willing to deny reality even if the truth is staring them in the >>>>>> face.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Thus, Trump urged Americans to remember that 2024 TV blackout, which >>>>>> nobody remembers because it didn?t happen. He insists that California has >>>>>> ?blackouts and brownouts every weekend >>>>>> ,? >>>>>> when the state?s 39 million residents can tell you it doesn?t. He says that >>>>>> you must show ID to buy groceries >>>>>> , >>>>>> which everyone who buys their own food knows isn?t so.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Do Trump and his followers actually believe these things? As I see >>>>>> it, that?s a category error, starting from the presumption that they even >>>>>> accept that objective facts exist. All the evidence (Hah! ?Evidence!?) says >>>>>> that they don?t.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *George Orwell, whose work seems more relevant by the day, knew all >>>>>> about this mindset. In his essay ?Looking back on the Spanish war >>>>>> ? >>>>>> he wrote about how the rise of totalitarianism had changed the rules:* >>>>>> >>>>>> *In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously coloured >>>>>> what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they >>>>>> must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that ?the facts? >>>>>> existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was >>>>>> always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by >>>>>> almost everyone.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Totalitarians, however, denied that objective facts existed. >>>>>> Furthermore, reality is mutable, changing with the leader?s whims:* >>>>>> >>>>>> *If the Leader says of such and such an event, ?It never happened? ? >>>>>> well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five ? well, two >>>>>> and two are five.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *If you find the assertion that MAGA has a totalitarian mindset over >>>>>> the top, all I can ask is, have you been following the news?* >>>>>> >>>>>> *What?s remarkable is the extent to which Republican politicians act >>>>>> as if they are living in a totalitarian state, when they aren?t ? not yet, >>>>>> anyway. ICE would clearly like to be an American Stasi, policing any >>>>>> deviation from the party line, but it?s not able, so far, to arrest members >>>>>> of Congress who express skepticism about the president?s claims. And many >>>>>> Republican politicians still, I believe, know the difference between >>>>>> fantasy and reality.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *But they behave as if they were courtiers to Kim Jong Un. Trump >>>>>> speeches are sometimes followed by ?endless applause moments >>>>>> ,? >>>>>> because none of Trump?s loyalists wants to be seen as the first person to >>>>>> stop clapping.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *The susceptibility of the GOP to this totalitarian mindset has come >>>>>> as a surprise even to cynics. I have some idea of how this happened: It >>>>>> involves a confluence of big-money corruption, crony capitalism, religious >>>>>> fanaticism, and the ever-present forces of racism and sexism. But that?s a >>>>>> subject to be delved into another day.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *What?s clear is that the war on reality is exacting a high price on >>>>>> America as a whole.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Remember, 1.2 million Americans died from Covid ? a number that >>>>>> would have been much lower if MAGA misinformation hadn?t caused so many >>>>>> people to refuse vaccination. Now we?re seeing a frightening rise in >>>>>> measles and other infectious diseases, and God help us if another pandemic >>>>>> strikes with Trump or his successor still in charge.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Climate denial and hostility to renewable energy will mean more >>>>>> pollution even as it consigns the U.S. to energy and economic backwardness.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *And the Iran war ? which Trump started and now refuses to end >>>>>> because he won?t accept reality ? has destroyed America?s credibility and >>>>>> depleted our weapon stocks with stunning speed.* >>>>>> >>>>>> *But anyone pointing out the obvious is, of course, a Communist.* >>>>>> >>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 13:06:22 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 14:06:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 at 13:53, Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > > I must put this debate on hold because of my current situation. My elderly father in law has lived in Spokane Washington for 37 years. We evacuated with the others yesterday ahead of the fire. Guessing it is in the national news by now. All are out safe but we don't yet know if he still has a house. It is inside the burn area on the map but we are told not all the homes burned in there. It took us fours hours to get to Ritzville yesterday oy vey. spike > _______________________________________________ Bad News! It looks really serious. BillK Quote: ?When the sun rises, we are going to be in shock?: Thousands evacuated in north Spokane as wildfire crosses river into city Aug. 1, 2026 Updated Sun., Aug. 2, 2026 at 12:50 a.m. Walls of flames destroyed dozens of homes and other structures in the Indian Trail neighborhood and more areas of Spokane on Saturday amid one of the worst natural disasters in the city?s history. ------------------------ From atymes at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 14:50:35 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 10:50:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 2, 2026 at 8:52?AM Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > I must put this debate on hold because of my current situation. My elderly father in law has lived in Spokane Washington for 37 years. We evacuated with the others yesterday ahead of the fire. Guessing it is in the national news by now. All are out safe but we don't yet know if he still has a house. It is inside the burn area on the map but we are told not all the homes burned in there. It took us fours hours to get to Ritzville yesterday oy vey. spike I remember when fires like that hit Oakland. We were on the far side of a large body of water and thus safe, but the skies turned dystopian cyberpunk smoky orange for a while. With all that smoke in the air, thank goodness our house had an air filter; we minimized going outside for the duration. From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 2 15:12:48 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 08:12:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. Message-ID: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1598924268605867/?mibextid=ZZyLBr The neighbor hiked in there, says we might as well go on to california there is nothing to come back to. All humans and dogs safe thirty miles outta town. Damn. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 2 15:22:46 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 08:22:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Reality is a Communist Plot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thx Adrian. We got out with almost everything which can't be replaced, the family photos and such. Now I don't know what else to do but continue south and thank evolution the carbon based life forms are ok. Open to suggestions. spike On Sun, Aug 2, 2026, 7:51?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2026 at 8:52?AM Gregory Jones via extropy-chat > wrote: > > I must put this debate on hold because of my current situation. My > elderly father in law has lived in Spokane Washington for 37 years. We > evacuated with the others yesterday ahead of the fire. Guessing it is in > the national news by now. All are out safe but we don't yet know if he > still has a house. It is inside the burn area on the map but we are told > not all the homes burned in there. It took us fours hours to get to > Ritzville yesterday oy vey. spike > > I remember when fires like that hit Oakland. We were on the far side > of a large body of water and thus safe, but the skies turned dystopian > cyberpunk smoky orange for a while. With all that smoke in the air, > thank goodness our house had an air filter; we minimized going outside > for the duration. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Aug 2 15:34:16 2026 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 11:34:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> Much sympathy. It's one of my nightmares living here in the woods. Some years are very frightening. If there are things your internet friends can do to help, please let us know. Warm regards, MB Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > https://www.facebook.com/reel/1598924268605867/?mibextid=ZZyLBr > > The neighbor hiked in there, says we might as well go on to california > there is nothing to come back to. > > All humans and dogs safe thirty miles outta town. > > Damn. > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 2 15:48:18 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (Gregory Jones) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 08:48:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. In-Reply-To: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> References: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> Message-ID: Thx MB. Decision has been made, flee to the safety of earthquake country search thru the ashes later. spike On Sun, Aug 2, 2026, 8:34?AM MB via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Much sympathy. It's one of my nightmares living here in the woods. Some > years are very frightening. If there are things your internet friends > can do to help, please let us know. > > Warm regards, > MB > > Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > > https://www.facebook.com/reel/1598924268605867/?mibextid=ZZyLBr > > > > The neighbor hiked in there, says we might as well go on to california > > there is nothing to come back to. > > > > All humans and dogs safe thirty miles outta town. > > > > Damn. > > > > 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 pharos at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 15:55:05 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 16:55:05 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Spokane wildfire videos Message-ID: Youtube now has several videos of the Spokane wildfire that Spike escaped from. They are frightening, especially the speed at which the windblown flames spread. BillK From brent.allsop at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 23:30:27 2026 From: brent.allsop at gmail.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 16:30:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. In-Reply-To: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> References: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> Message-ID: Dang, so sorry. Yes, if there is anything your Internet friends can do to help let us know. On Sun, Aug 2, 2026, 8:34?AM MB via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Much sympathy. It's one of my nightmares living here in the woods. Some > years are very frightening. If there are things your internet friends > can do to help, please let us know. > > Warm regards, > MB > > Gregory Jones via extropy-chat wrote: > > https://www.facebook.com/reel/1598924268605867/?mibextid=ZZyLBr > > > > The neighbor hiked in there, says we might as well go on to california > > there is nothing to come back to. > > > > All humans and dogs safe thirty miles outta town. > > > > Damn. > > > > 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 23:32:34 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 19:32:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How China Won the Iran War Message-ID: *Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman wrote this today:* *===* How China Won the Iran War*Trump has shattered American power, and Beijing is picking up the pieces* by Paul Krugman In 2023 the following countries preferred the US over China, today in 2026 they favored China over the US; Canada, Spain, Indonesia, UK, Australia, Sweden, Italy, Greece, Netherlands, Germany, France and Argentina. *Pew* Make America Great Again? Hah. Donald Trump has weakened us with astonishing speed. Under his ?leadership? America?s influence, reputation and credibility have peeled away like the liner in the Reflecting Pool. The disintegration of U.S. power was well underway before Trump started his war on Iran, but the pace of decline has accelerated sharply since the magnitude of our defeat started becoming apparent. And when future historians write about this tale of self-immolation, they may well do so in Mandarin. China hasn?t been a direct combatant in the third Gulf war, and its support for Iran has, until recently, been discreet. (China is now reportedly preparing to send Iran advanced munitions ? Phillips O?Brien suggests that it is ?going in for the kill.?) But China has clearly relished our humiliation. And both the way the war has played out and China?s role have drastically shifted the global balance of power in China?s favor. China has been a serious geopolitical rival to the United States for some time. China?s manufacturing sector overtook the US in 2010, and the gap has continued to grow. And China?s role as the workshop of the world inevitably gives it a great deal of geopolitical influence. However, there were a number of factors that, two years ago, arguably still gave America a power advantage despite China?s economic weight and manufacturing prowess. These factors included: ? America still led the world in science and cutting-edge technology ? The U.S. military appeared to have vastly better weapons and leadership than any other nation?s ? The dollar?s dominant role in international transactions gave the United States enormous financial clout, including the ability to cut other nations out of the global payments system ? Above all, the U.S. wasn?t alone. We were the leader of history?s most successful alliance system, nations bound together not just by mutual interests but by shared democratic values Yet *Trump and his lackeys have quickly squandered all of these advantages.* A great deal has been written about the Trump administration?s attack on science, which is a topic largely separate from the Iran war. As one recent discussion put it, Trump officials have *orchestrated a series of attacks on scientists and their laboratories, implemented through funding cuts, grant interruptions, and immigration restrictions. Scientists are gravitating to Canada, Europe, and China*, and we are rapidly losing the depth of our innovative and essential scientific community. The undermining of other U.S. sources of strength was also underway before the Iran war, but the war has accelerated the downward spiral. Even before the bombing of Iran began, some observers worried about the state of the U.S. military. Had U.S. military leaders adapted to the new world ? revealed by the war in Ukraine ? of cheap, ubiquitous drones? How much damage had the pro-testosterone, anti-intellectual leadership of Pete Hegseth already done? Now we know the answers to these questions, and *America?s military reputation has nose-dived.* Oh, and as a December 2025 report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies points out, a Chinese supply chain underpins ?the architecture of modern drone warfare.? America?s dollar-linked financial power has also sharply declined. True, as I wrote a month ago , ?The dollar?s role as the dominant currency for ordinary business is not under threat.? However, the war has demonstrated that, thanks in large part to China?s underlying economic power, America?s ability to weaponize the dollar has been greatly reduced: Iran was able to continue selling oil (until the U.S. temporarily imposed a military blockade) and buying essential imports, despite U.S. financial sanctions, by taking payment in yuan and using those yuan to buy Chinese goods. Ships that paid Iran for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz also paid in yuan (or in cryptocurrency, whose only real use case remains criminal activity.) The details are complicated, but using yuan essentially allows those designated by the U.S. government as rogue actors to fly under our financial radar. Finally, the war has really put the nail in the coffin of the U.S.-centered alliance system. America?s alliances have been a fundamental source of global strength since World War II. The line labeled ?US+EU? in the chart on manufacturing value added is an indication of how much these alliances used to strengthen us: It shows that even now the US and the democracies of the European Union combined produce more manufactured goods than China, a lead that would be larger if I included the UK, Japan, Canada, etc. But Trump began torpedoing our alliances on day one. Discussions of the Trump tariffs, even critical ones, don?t emphasize enough the fact that every one of these tariffs broke international agreements made by the United States in the past. So *Trumpian tariff policy, by itself, was an announcement to the world that agreements with the U.S. government are worthless. Add to this the demands that Canada become the 51st state, that Denmark hand over Greenland, and so on*, and America had thoroughly lost the trust of its former friends even before the Iran war. Then came the war. And* in the past five months the U.S. has shown itself both erratic and ineffectua**l*. Trump launched a war that, in addition to creating death and destruction, cut off much of the world?s oil supply without so much as consulting other nations. Once the war began, America proved both incapable of imposing its will on Iran and unable either to open the Strait of Hormuz or to protect regional allies. So now *the world neither trusts nor fears us*. The chart at the top of this post, drawn from the Pew survey of global attitudes, shows views of the US and China in multiple countries. Even many of our oldest allies, the nations that helped us win World War II and the Cold War, now have a more favorable opinion of China than they do of us. Let?s be clear: The end of U.S. leadership and China?s growing geopolitical ascendancy are bad things. China is a corrupt autocracy, with little respect for human rights and none at all for democratic values. But *people around the world have concluded that the Chinese are serious people, and that we are not. So America lost the war ? and China won.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 4 04:49:51 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 21:49:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] spokane destruction In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04b301dd23cc$b0aef720$120ce560$@rainier66.com> Bad News! It looks really serious. BillK < https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/aug/01/fast-moving-fire-breaks-out-in-airway-heights-area/> This is the map of the fire: The blue dot is where the house was. The entire neighborhood of several hundred homes near Rifle Club Road burned. All the way home to California, we were getting calls from friends and family, neighbors checking on each other. We saved the family photo albums and some collectables. The rest of it is up in smoke. Everyone survived. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 28529 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15460 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 4 05:44:53 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 22:44:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. In-Reply-To: References: <1c661af2-8d50-c349-7dbe-92cc21f3972b@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <079f01dd23d4$6067fed0$2137fc70$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Brent Allsop via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] We just heard the house burned to the foundation. >?Dang, so sorry. >?Yes, if there is anything your Internet friends can do to help let us know? Thx Brent, meh, it?s only stuff. Easy for me to say, for very little of it was my stuff. Coupla shootin arns, not collectibles, a few hundred rounds of ammo. Come to think of it, when the fire reached that ammo it woulda been an unmistakable signal to get on outta Dodge, forthwith. Insurance company appears to be doing the right thing. FIL had plenty of insurance. Such a paranoid sort! He kept up to date, increasing coverage with annual home evaluations, paying right up. Absurd! Who does that? Surely it is a form of madness, to be actually prepared for such an unlikely catastrophe as the one which occurred. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 09:46:21 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 10:46:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Suspect arrested for arson in Spokane Fire Message-ID: Investigators arrest 37-year-old man in connection to devastating Spokane County wildfire Aug. 3, 2026 Updated Mon., Aug. 3, 2026 at 11:54 p.m. Quote: A 37-year-old man accused of setting the fire that destroyed a swath of northwest Spokane, including hundreds of homes, was arrested Monday 4 miles from the site where it began. ------------ Video of Police News Conference. Old Trails Fire Full Press Conference: Suspect arrested. Sheriff John Nowels, Spokane Valley Police Chief Ellis, and Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney Preston McCollam share updates on the Old Trails Fire. ----------------------- BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 11:29:56 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 07:29:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] White House Whipsaws Silicon Valley (and Itself) Over A.I. Rules Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. White House Whipsaws Silicon Valley (and Itself) Over A.I. Rules The Trump administration has struggled over how to approach to ?open source? models, which are freely available to download and favored by Chinese companies. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/04/technology/ai-washington-regulation-whiplash.html?unlocked_article_code=1.21A.sb5A.5gVzJUaBYpms&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 12:14:09 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 08:14:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Open Weights and American AI Leadership Message-ID: *Jensen Huang, the boss of the world's most valuable company, Nvidia, originally wrote this on X/Twitter a few days ago, it's the first time he had ever written anything on that platform. And I think he makes a lot of sense. * *Open Weights and American AI Leadership* *John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis * poa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 4 23:41:25 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 16:41:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? Message-ID: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> Our recent fire catastrophe in Spokane was human caused, but nature also played a big role: the wind enabled a lone arsonist to destroy hundreds of homes. Generally we mark the era of modern meteorology from 1960, with the launch of the first successful weather satellite. TIROS-1 enabled humans to observe and measure hurricanes out at sea. In the 66 years of data we now have, the record for the latest in the year for the first Atlantic hurricane of the season, was set by Erin, which formed a tropical depression on 11 August 2025 and reached hurricane strength on 15 August. Every other year since 1960, there were hurricanes earlier in the season than the ides of August. Now, on 4 August, NOAA is saying there is no tropical cyclone activity expected in the Atlantic in the next seven days, which takes us out to 11 August. If the Atlantic doesn't get with it right away, we could have two record setting years in a row. All this leads me to a question I have long had: if climate changes, how do we know the change is necessarily for the worse? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 10:17:17 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 11:17:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? In-Reply-To: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> References: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 at 00:42, spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > Now, on 4 August, NOAA is saying there is no tropical cyclone activity > expected in the Atlantic in the next seven days, which takes us out to 11 > August. If the Atlantic doesn?t get with it right away, we could have two > record setting years in a row. > > > > All this leads me to a question I have long had: if climate changes, how > do we know the change is necessarily for the worse? > > spike > _______________________________________________ > The latest Qwen 3.8 Max Thinking AI provided a good analysis. Yes, there are some beneficial changes, like agriculture in the Arctic regions. But they are vastly outweighed by changes for the worse to existing agriculture. BillK Question: If the world climate is changing, how do we know it is getting worse rather than better, or just a different set of problems? Qwen 3.8 Max Thinking AI: The question of whether climate change is getting "worse," "better," or just "different" is one of the most critical issues in modern science and policy. To answer it, scientists, economists, and sociologists do not just look at temperature; they look at the *rate of change*, *systemic stability*, and the *capacity for adaptation*. While the Earth?s climate has always changed naturally, the scientific consensus is that current climate change is getting objectively "worse" for human civilization and global ecosystems. Here is a breakdown of how experts reach this conclusion. 1. The Definition of "Worse": The Holocene Baseline To determine if things are getting worse, we must define a baseline. Human civilization?including our agriculture, coastal cities, and global supply chains?developed over the last 10,000 years during a geological epoch called the *Holocene*. This period was characterized by a remarkably stable climate. "Worse" is defined as moving away from the stable conditions that currently support 8 billion people. - *Better:* Conditions that allow for stable food production, manageable weather patterns, and the preservation of current coastlines and biodiversity. - *Worse:* Conditions that increase famine, mass migration, economic instability, and the loss of habitable land. 2. The Speed of Change (Velocity) The primary reason scientists view current change as "worse" than historical natural cycles is the *velocity* of the warming. - *Historical Context:* In the past, natural global warming (such as the exit from an Ice Age) took thousands of years. This gave ecosystems time to migrate and adapt. - *Current Context:* Human-driven greenhouse gas emissions have forced similar amounts of warming into a matter of *decades*. - *The Consequence:* Ecosystems and human infrastructure cannot adapt fast enough. For example, trees and animals cannot migrate to cooler latitudes quickly enough to survive, leading to mass extinction events. Infrastructure (roads, dams, cities) built for the climate of the 20th century is becoming obsolete or dangerous much faster than it can be replaced. 3. "Better" vs. "Worse": The Global Balance Sheet It is true that climate change creates a "different set of problems" and even some localized benefits. However, the global consensus is that these are vastly outweighed by systemic harms. The "Better" (Localized Benefits) - *Longer Growing Seasons:* High-latitude regions (like parts of Canada, Russia, and Scandinavia) may see longer agricultural seasons and fewer winter deaths from cold. - *New Trade Routes:* Melting Arctic sea ice opens the Northwest Passage, shortening shipping routes. - *CO2 Fertilization:* Higher CO2 can initially boost plant growth in some areas (though this effect diminishes as heat and water stress increase). The "Worse" (Systemic Risks) While a farmer in Siberia might benefit, the global food system is interconnected, and the net impact is negative. - *Tropical and Temperate Crop Failure:* Staple crops (wheat, corn, rice) are highly sensitive to heat. Warming in already-hot regions (which produce the bulk of the world's calories) leads to massive yield drops, triggering global food price spikes and famine. - *Water Scarcity:* Changes in precipitation patterns and the loss of mountain glaciers (which act as water towers for billions of people in Asia and South America) threaten drinking water and irrigation for massive populations. - *Extreme Weather:* The energy in the climate system is increasing, leading to more intense hurricanes, heavier rainfall (causing flash floods), and prolonged, hotter droughts that fuel mega-fires. - *Sea Level Rise:* Unlike the "different problem" of a new shipping route, sea-level rise is a strictly "worse" problem. It permanently destroys high-value real estate, displaces millions of people (creating climate refugees), and causes saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. 4. Phenomena with No "Benefits" Some aspects of climate change are entirely negative and represent a degradation of the planetary system: - *Ocean Acidification:* The ocean absorbs about 25% of human-emitted CO2, changing its chemistry. This makes it difficult for marine life (corals, shellfish, plankton) to build shells. Since plankton is the base of the marine food web, this threatens the entire ocean ecosystem and the fisheries humans rely on. There is no beneficial side to ocean acidification. - *Wet Bulb Temperatures:* As heat and humidity rise, we approach "wet bulb" thresholds where the human body can no longer cool itself by sweating. In these conditions, even healthy people resting in the shade can die of heatstroke within hours. This makes parts of the tropics and subtropics temporarily uninhabitable. 5. Tipping Points and Irreversibility Scientists are concerned with "worse" because of *tipping points*?thresholds that, once crossed, lead to irreversible and self-perpetuating changes. - *Permafrost Thaw:* As the Arctic warms, permafrost melts, releasing methane (a potent greenhouse gas). This causes more warming, which causes more melting. We cannot "turn this off" even if we stop human emissions. - *Ice Sheet Collapse:* The destabilization of the West Antarctic or Greenland ice sheets could raise sea levels by several meters over centuries, a change that cannot be undone on human timescales. - *Amazon Dieback:* The Amazon rainforest is drying out and may transition into a savanna. This would release billions of tons of stored carbon and destroy the most biodiverse ecosystem on Earth. How Scientists Measure the Trajectory We know it is getting worse through rigorous data collection: 1. *Attribution Science:* Scientists can now calculate exactly how much more likely a specific heatwave or flood was made by human-caused climate change. The frequency of "1-in-100-year" events is increasing globally. 2. *Paleoclimatology:* By studying ice cores and tree rings, we know that CO2 levels are higher now than at any point in the last 2 million years, and they are rising 100x faster than the fastest natural increase in the geological record. 3. *Observational Evidence:* Satellites, ocean buoys, and weather stations track the melting of ice, the rising of seas, and the shifting of biomes in real-time, confirming that the most severe climate models are coming true. Summary We know climate change is getting "worse" because it is destabilizing the narrow environmental band that allowed human civilization to thrive. While the planet itself will survive?and eventually evolve new ecosystems over millions of years?the current trajectory is objectively worsening the prospects for global economic stability, food security, and human safety in the coming centuries. ------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 11:18:13 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 07:18:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? In-Reply-To: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> References: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 7:42?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: *Spike, I'm very glad that neither you nor any member of your family were hurt by the wildfire. * *> Our recent fire catastrophe in Spokane was human caused, but nature also > played a big role: the wind enabled a lone arsonist to destroy hundreds of > homes.* > > *Generally we mark the era of modern meteorology from 1960, with the > launch of the first successful weather satellite. TIROS-1 enabled humans > to observe and measure hurricanes out at sea. In the 66 years of data we > now have, the record for the latest in the year for the first Atlantic > hurricane of the season, was set by Erin, which formed a tropical > depression on 11 August 2025 and reached hurricane strength on 15 August. > Every other year since 1960, there were hurricanes earlier in the season > than the ides of August.* > > *Now, on 4 August, NOAA is saying there is no tropical cyclone activity > expected in the Atlantic in the next seven days, which takes us out to 11 > August. If the Atlantic doesn?t get with it right away, we could have two > record setting years in a row.* > *Currently we are experiencing one of the most powerful Pacific El Ni?os ever known, and it has not yet reached its peak. Historically the strength of El Ni?o is correlated with wetter than average winters in Southern California and the US Southwest but for the pacific northwest, like Spokane, the stronger the El Ni?o the warmer and drier the conditions are, and that's just what's needed for wildfires. It looks like a human deliberately produced the spark that caused the inferno, but the conditions were such that if he hadn't some natural phenomenon probably would soon have done so. You just can't keep a pencil balance on its tip forever, something is going to nudge it over. * *But** there is an INVERSE relationship between the strength of the Pacific El Ni?o and Atlantic hurricanes; the stronger the El Ni?o is the dryer and more fire prone Spokane becomes however thanks to El Ni?o, fewer Atlantic hurricanes occur; so that's good for me in Florida, but the same phenomenon causes very dry conditions for people in Washington, Oregon and northern Idaho, and that's bad for people living there. * > > *> All this leads me to a question I have long had: if climate changes, > how do we know the change is necessarily for the worse?* > *The paleontologic record is clear, for billions of years the climate has been continuously in a state of flux, so there's no reason to believe that the climate we have right now is objectively the best one. Whether climate change helped or hurt an animal's chance of getting its genes into the next generation depended on precisely where an animal was located and how it made its living. And the same thing is true for human beings. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 20:43:32 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 13:43:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto Message-ID: I really doubt the originator of Bitcoin follows this list, but if he does, I would like to get in touch. Assuming he has not lost the key, he has about $80 billion in Bitcoins. The SolarSynga project needs money on that scale. It would take around 30 gasifiers at maybe $250 million each to process all the trash LA generates. Keith -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 21:55:51 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 17:55:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: He has pretty thoroughly demonstrated he's not going to use it to invest in anything. At this point, I'd assume that either he has in fact lost the key, or he thinks it's in his best interest to act as if he has, and that either way all those Bitcoins he has effectively don't exist. Find a way to demonstrate it on prototype scale. It doesn't need to be profitable on prototype scale, but it does have to demonstrate actual production. Theorycrafting is fine, but you will not get that scale of money (any time in the next several years and this side of the Singularity, at least) until after you have done a physical demonstration. I suggest identifying some trivial, tiny piece that you can do on, say, $100K-200K, and proposing that miniscule starting piece to the Department of Energy SBIR program when their Phase I submissions reopen later this year. Once you've done that, then the DOE might be willing to put in $2M for a slightly less tiny demonstrator under "Phase II"...and after you've done that, then Phase III might open up to do one of the gasifiers you mentioned. It doesn't matter that you think you have all the plans right now; outside of military funding (and often even then), you generally have to do that kind of scale-up proof. It's slow, it sucks, but the alternative to prototype-then-scale-up is begging for the rest of your life (or until you give up) for funding and never getting a dime. What your idea is, is irrelevant: you could solve the energy crisis forever and there still won't be funding from anywhere if you need $1B+ before you show any results at all. This is the Extropians list. Effective action is called for. Don't bang your head on paths that have been thoroughly proven to not work. On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 4:44?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat wrote: > > I really doubt the originator of Bitcoin follows this list, but if he does, I would like to get in touch. Assuming he has not lost the key, he has about $80 billion in Bitcoins. > > The SolarSynga project needs money on that scale. It would take around 30 gasifiers at maybe $250 million each to process all the trash LA generates. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 00:49:01 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 17:49:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? In-Reply-To: References: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <017201dd253d$5ffa87f0$1fef97d0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark . >?Spike, I'm very glad that neither you nor any member of your family were hurt by the wildfire? Thx John. > Our recent fire catastrophe in Spokane was human caused, but nature also played a big role: the wind enabled a lone arsonist to destroy hundreds of homes? ? >?But there is an INVERSE relationship between the strength of the Pacific El Ni?o and Atlantic hurricanes; the stronger the El Ni?o is the dryer and more fire prone Spokane becomes however thanks to El Ni?o?John K Clark Ja, they had a dry spring this year, but there was another important factor. I agree there will always be an ignition source. Out west of town there are trails out thru the woods, where a prole can backpack and camp anywhere he wants. Campfires can get away from them. Of course there are firebugs, as was the case this time. There are occasional big winds, as was the case this time. But the biggest factor this time was the fire getting in these trees shown in the photo below, ponderosa pines. These are controversial, since they are known fire hazards. They are native to this area: it was a ponderosa pine forest before developers built the neighborhood in the late 1980s. They thinned the forest, took out the biggest (most dangerous) of the trees, but that species grows a foot to a 1.5 ft per year. It has been 37 years since the area was built up. The trees had nearly ideal growing conditions, since they had been thinned (fewer competing trees) and had plenty of water from being in irrigated lawns. I mentioned the trees were controversial. The environmentalists argued that the trees were far less susceptible to structural failure and fire because homeowners took out any which were infested by pine beetles and the lawn trees had plenty of water. However? even with those advantages? those trees were prone to breaking off without warning. I took the photo below about one minute after we began evacuation. Note the right side of the photo, there are four trees and one stump about the height a tall man can reach. That tree broke off without warning about two months ago. The tree fell across the road. It was not infested with pine beetles. It just broke off, as these trees do. My FIL originally had four ponderosas in his yard. He removed two of them about 20 yrs ago after it became clear they were a hazard to the neighbors. About 4 yrs ago, I convinced him to remove the remaining two because of the fire hazard, however there were still pleeeenty of those trees in the neighborhood, which had grown very tall. Compare the height of the trees with that two story home on the left of the photo below: As we evacuated downwind, I could see there was a great risk of a crown fire in those trees. If the foliage catches fire, it burns quickly, then rains down hot embers on the homes below for hours. Less than one minute after I took this photo, an ash glob about the size of a ping pong ball fell on my windshield. It burned a notch in my wiper. When I saw that, I knew what was coming, but didn?t know how quickly it would happen. The neighborhood burned because homeowners refused to get rid of those accursed ponderosa pines. Those pine tree keepers are as much to blame as the arsonist. If you have one in your yard, I do sincerely encourage you to get the hell rid of 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: 27561 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 01:00:06 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 18:00:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 2:56?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > He has pretty thoroughly demonstrated he's not going to use it to > invest in anything. > At this point, I'd assume that either he has in fact lost the key, or > he thinks it's in his best interest to act as if he has, and that > either way all those Bitcoins he has effectively don't exist. > > Find a way to demonstrate it on prototype scale. Sigh, 100 tons-per-day gasifiers using plasma torches for heat have been done 20 years ago. The main difference here is using induction instead of high maintenance plasma torches. I am thinking of 2500 tons-per-day for a prototype. That's one part in 30 for what would be needed for Los Angeles. The AIs guess such a prototype would cost $200 to $300 million. At some point, a demonstration will not work because of scaling laws. Small devices have unfavorable surface to volume ratios. A 160 MW prototype is expected to leak at least 8 MW. I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satpshi. At some point, a demonstration will not work because of scaling laws. Small devices have unfavorable surface to volume ratios. A 160 MW prototype is expected to leak at least 8 MW. I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satpshi. It doesn't need to > be profitable on prototype scale, but it does have to demonstrate > actual production. Theorycrafting is fine, but you will not get that > scale of money (any time in the next several years and this side of > the Singularity, at least) until after you have done a physical > demonstration. > Would this project be useful after the singularity? Or would every home have a recycle machine? Near as I can tell, every part of this project exists at a high TRL. The most exotic part is the shaff gasifier with a pool of 1600 deg C iron in the bottom. It would draw 160 MW to keep it hot. There are melting furnaces up to perhaps 30-40 MW. You are right to be concerned about it working. A huge waste to aviation fuel project in Reno went bust a few years ago. https://www.greenairnews.com/?p=8361 It is a really interesting story. I talked to Jim Stonecipher a few weeks ago. I would love to have him as a reviewer or advisor. > > I suggest identifying some trivial, tiny piece that you can do on, > say, $100K-200K, and proposing that miniscule starting piece to the > Department of Energy SBIR program Maybe. This is related to renewable energy and you know how any project related to that is doing. But then, maybe I should see if Trump would give me a billion *not* to do it. when their Phase I submissions > reopen later this year. Once you've done that, then the DOE might be > willing to put in $2M for a slightly less tiny demonstrator under > "Phase II"...and after you've done that, then Phase III might open up > to do one of the gasifiers you mentioned. It doesn't matter that you > think you have all the plans right now; outside of military funding > (and often even then), you generally have to do that kind of scale-up > proof. > > It's slow, it sucks, but the alternative to prototype-then-scale-up is > begging for the rest of your life (or until you give up) for funding > and never getting a dime. Maybe. I have two or three organizations that have been bugging me to take funding from them. But I doubt they would actually part with a dime considering this project does not have a CEO, a management team, or even a corporate structure.. > What your idea is, is irrelevant: you could > solve the energy crisis forever and there still won't be funding from > anywhere if you need $1B+ before you show any results at all. > > This is the Extropians list. Effective action is called for. Don't > bang your head on paths that have been thoroughly proven to not work. > I did that, worked for ten years or more on power satellites. Finally gave up when the best I could do was 3 cents per kWh and PV solar got down to 1.35 cents per kWh. The other problem was it took $60 B to get it started. By comparison, SolarSyngas is a pittance. > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 4:44?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat > wrote: > > > > I really doubt the originator of Bitcoin follows this list, but if he > does, I would like to get in touch. Assuming he has not lost the key, he > has about $80 billion in Bitcoins. > > > > The SolarSynga project needs money on that scale. It would take around > 30 gasifiers at maybe $250 million each to process all the trash LA > generates. > > > > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 01:10:44 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 18:10:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat ? >?I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satoshi?. As I understand it, Elon has a staff tasked with filtering technical proposals. They only let the best ideas thru. I would think getting thru that filter is more likely than alternatives. Elon has a lotta money to invest: he is renting out jillions of GPUs to Dario. All that needs to be invested. Your 200 to 300 G$ is a week?s revenue on that data farm. Keith, I would suggest posting your pitch to him. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 01:20:45 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 21:20:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Who's this Arel Lucas you CCed? I've removed him from this CC for this email. On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:00?PM Keith Henson wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 2:56?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> >> He has pretty thoroughly demonstrated he's not going to use it to >> invest in anything. >> >> At this point, I'd assume that either he has in fact lost the key, or >> he thinks it's in his best interest to act as if he has, and that >> either way all those Bitcoins he has effectively don't exist. >> >> Find a way to demonstrate it on prototype scale. > > > Sigh, 100 tons-per-day gasifiers using plasma torches for heat have been done 20 years ago. The main difference here is using induction instead of high maintenance plasma torches. So demonstrate that. There's also, have YOUR SPECIFIC GASIFIERS been demonstrated? No. You personally have never operated a gasifier, I'd wager. You'd think that really really shouldn't matter - only the physics should matter. But when you get into that kind of money, the people and personal experience really really do matter...in the judgment of those with money, and they are the ones who get to set the rules, regardless of what should be the case. > I am thinking of 2500 tons-per-day for a prototype. That's one part in 30 for what would be needed for Los Angeles. The AIs guess such a prototype would cost $200 to $300 million. So go down to 2.5 tons per day. I am not kidding. > At some point, a demonstration will not work because of scaling laws. Small devices have unfavorable surface to volume ratios. A 160 MW prototype is expected to leak at least 8 MW. So it would leak. That's fine, so long as it leaks in exactly the expected amount. The prototype is not expected to be practical for profitable operation. It is intended to demonstrate your claims (and, again, build up demonstrable personal experience) on a small budget. > Would this project be useful after the singularity? Or would every home have a recycle machine? So don't worry about it post-singularity. Worry about the path to get it going without waiting for the singularity. Besides, even post-singularity, at least shortly-post, you'll have incrementally advanced stuff, which can help. Even godlike AIs - especially the early generations - are constrained by physical reality and can only move so fast. >> I suggest identifying some trivial, tiny piece that you can do on, >> say, $100K-200K, and proposing that miniscule starting piece to the >> Department of Energy SBIR program > > Maybe. This is related to renewable energy and you know how any project related to that is doing. But then, maybe I should see if Trump would give me a billion *not* to do it. Nah, pitch it as related to fossil fuels. It is, technically. > I have two or three organizations that have been bugging me to take funding from them. But I doubt they would actually part with a dime considering this project does not have a CEO, a management team, or even a corporate structure.. Tch. Guys who say they'll fund you, until they get a good look at you? Yeah, I've dealt with plenty of them. Their face people seem to be paid purely by how many people they slam to their higher-ups regardless of whether everyone knows that no sale is possible. That is not the best incentive structure, but too many of those with money won't trust their subordinates to think and qualify/curate leads. > I did that, worked for ten years or more on power satellites. Finally gave up when the best I could do was 3 cents per kWh and PV solar got down to 1.35 cents per kWh. The other problem was it took $60 B to get it started. By comparison, SolarSyngas is a pittance. Eh. There's more money flowing into power sats these days. If you might consider un-giving-up, you might check https://ssi.org/solar-power-satellites/sps-news/ and look around for anyone who's hiring or working on a design you like. From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 01:22:34 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 21:22:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:11?PM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat > >?I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satoshi?. > > As I understand it, Elon has a staff tasked with filtering technical proposals. They only let the best ideas thru. I would think getting thru that filter is more likely than alternatives. Elon has a lotta money to invest: he is renting out jillions of GPUs to Dario. All that needs to be invested. Your 200 to 300 G$ is a week?s revenue on that data farm. Keith, I would suggest posting your pitch to him. If you could see yourself working for SpaceX, maybe work with them on the power side of the AI satellites they're proposing. Spinning off beamed power and ditching the orbiting AI angle is one possible eventual outcome. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 02:05:15 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 19:05:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? In-Reply-To: <017201dd253d$5ffa87f0$1fef97d0$@rainier66.com> References: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> <017201dd253d$5ffa87f0$1fef97d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: That's really interesting, Spike. Ponderosa pines are fire-resistant, with thick bark, to low-level fires that burn out the needles and undergrowth. The ones in Arizona forests often have burn scars every ten years or so. My parents' place in Prescott had several. Two were at least 30 years old in 1960. The pine beetles finally killed them. My brother, who still lives there, was looking at perhaps $2000 to take them down when the power company came by last year and took them out. Cut them up to fireplace size, and someone he knew took them away. Ponderosas are lovely trees; it is not hard to see why people want to live among them. But they are definitely a fire hazard, though maybe not as bad as the eucalyptus that burned in the big Oakland fire. My brother lives downwind from a ponderosa forest in mostly juniper and oak. He knows the house is not likely to survive a forest fire, but he won't clear out the trees. It would ruin the view. Keith On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 5:49?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > > > *From:* John Clark > *.* > > > > *>?Spike**,** I'm very glad that neither you nor any member of your > family were hurt by the wildfire?* > > > > * Thx John. * > > > > *> **Our recent fire catastrophe in Spokane was human caused, but nature > also played a big role: the wind enabled a lone arsonist to destroy > hundreds of homes?* > > *?* > > > > *>?But** there is an INVERSE relationship between the strength of the > Pacific El Ni?o and Atlantic hurricanes; the stronger the El Ni?o is the > dryer and more fire prone Spokane becomes however thanks to El Ni?o?John K > Clark* > > > > > > *Ja, they had a dry spring this year, but there was another important > factor.* > > > > *I agree there will always be an ignition source. Out west of town there > are trails out thru the woods, where a prole can backpack and camp anywhere > he wants. Campfires can get away from them. Of course there are firebugs, > as was the case this time. There are occasional big winds, as was the case > this time.* > > > > *But the biggest factor this time was the fire getting in these trees > shown in the photo below, ponderosa pines. These are controversial, since > they are known fire hazards. They are native to this area: it was a > ponderosa pine forest before developers built the neighborhood in the late > 1980s. They thinned the forest, took out the biggest (most dangerous) of > the trees, but that species grows a foot to a 1.5 ft per year. It has been > 37 years since the area was built up. The trees had nearly ideal growing > conditions, since they had been thinned (fewer competing trees) and had > plenty of water from being in irrigated lawns. * > > > > *I mentioned the trees were controversial. The environmentalists argued > that the trees were far less susceptible to structural failure and fire > because homeowners took out any which were infested by pine beetles and the > lawn trees had plenty of water. However? even with those advantages? those > trees were prone to breaking off without warning.* > > > > *I took the photo below about one minute after we began evacuation. Note > the right side of the photo, there are four trees and one stump about the > height a tall man can reach. That tree broke off without warning about two > months ago. The tree fell across the road. It was not infested with pine > beetles. It just broke off, as these trees do.* > > > > *My FIL originally had four ponderosas in his yard. He removed two of > them about 20 yrs ago after it became clear they were a hazard to the > neighbors. About 4 yrs ago, I convinced him to remove the remaining two > because of the fire hazard, however there were still pleeeenty of those > trees in the neighborhood, which had grown very tall. Compare the height > of the trees with that two story home on the left of the photo below: * > > > > > > *As we evacuated downwind, I could see there was a great risk of a crown > fire in those trees. If the foliage catches fire, it burns quickly, then > rains down hot embers on the homes below for hours. Less than one minute > after I took this photo, an ash glob about the size of a ping pong ball > fell on my windshield. It burned a notch in my wiper. When I saw that, I > knew what was coming, but didn?t know how quickly it would happen. * > > > > *The neighborhood burned because homeowners refused to get rid of those > accursed ponderosa pines. Those pine tree keepers are as much to blame as > the arsonist. If you have one in your yard, I do sincerely encourage you > to get the hell rid of it.* > > > > *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: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 27561 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 02:10:22 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 19:10:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Spike, would you know how to reach Elon's filter? Keith On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 6:10?PM wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat *On Behalf > Of *Keith Henson via extropy-chat > *?* > > > > >?I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of > anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does > but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satoshi?. > > > > As I understand it, Elon has a staff tasked with filtering technical > proposals. They only let the best ideas thru. I would think getting thru > that filter is more likely than alternatives. Elon has a lotta money to > invest: he is renting out jillions of GPUs to Dario. All that needs to be > invested. Your 200 to 300 G$ is a week?s revenue on that data farm. > Keith, I would suggest posting your pitch to him. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 02:58:51 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 22:58:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: If you can get yourself to work on power satellites again, that's part of what SpaceX is apparently calling "Starmind". Granted, their focus is on powering orbiting AI satellites - but, again, spinoff. https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/8639247002 would be one place to start. On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 10:11?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat wrote: > > Spike, would you know how to reach Elon's filter? > > Keith > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 6:10?PM wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat >> ? >> >> >> >> >?I know the Bitcoin founder is a real long shot. But I don't know of anyone else who has the depth of pocket for this project. Well, Elon does but making contact with him is probably as hard as reaching Satoshi?. >> >> >> >> As I understand it, Elon has a staff tasked with filtering technical proposals. They only let the best ideas thru. I would think getting thru that filter is more likely than alternatives. Elon has a lotta money to invest: he is renting out jillions of GPUs to Dario. All that needs to be invested. Your 200 to 300 G$ is a week?s revenue on that data farm. Keith, I would suggest posting your pitch to him. >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 03:37:39 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 20:37:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 6:21?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Who's this Arel Lucas you CCed? I've removed him from this CC for this > email. > My wife. She is deeply involved in this topic. Spike knows her because he used to come to our Pensfa parties in San Carlos. > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:00?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 2:56?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> > >> He has pretty thoroughly demonstrated he's not going to use it to > >> invest in anything. > >> > >> At this point, I'd assume that either he has in fact lost the key, or > >> he thinks it's in his best interest to act as if he has, and that > >> either way all those Bitcoins he has effectively don't exist. > >> > >> Find a way to demonstrate it on prototype scale. > > > > Sigh, 100 tons-per-day gasifiers using plasma torches for heat have been > done 20 years ago. The main difference here is using induction instead of > high maintenance plasma torches. > > So demonstrate that. > > It has been done, the plant ran for years in Canada. . > There's also, have YOUR SPECIFIC GASIFIERS been demonstrated? > > No. You personally have never operated a gasifier, I'd wager. You'd > think that really really shouldn't matter - only the physics should > matter. But when you get into that kind of money, the people and > personal experience really really do matter...in the judgment of those > with money, and they are the ones who get to set the rules, regardless > of what should be the case. > Agreed. Unfortunately the people who did run gasifiers, some at this scale are dead, the last coal gasifiers in the US were closed in the 1940s when town gas was replaced by natural gas. Come to think about it, that's not entirely true. There is a plant in North Dakota that gasifies 16000 tons of coal a day with oxygen and converts it to methane. It is a different process, burning much of the coal to make syngas. However, I am sure one of their engineers could be recruited to this project if it had serious resources. In fact, I know one of them through email. > > > I am thinking of 2500 tons-per-day for a prototype. That's one part in > 30 for what would be needed for Los Angeles. The AIs guess such a prototype > would cost $200 to $300 million. > > So go down to 2.5 tons per day. I am not kidding. > > > At some point, a demonstration will not work because of scaling laws. > Small devices have unfavorable surface to volume ratios. A 160 MW prototype > is expected to leak at least 8 MW. > > So it would leak. That's fine, so long as it leaks in exactly the > expected amount. The prototype is not expected to be practical for > profitable operation. It is intended to demonstrate your claims (and, > again, build up demonstrable personal experience) on a small budget. > > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. > Would this project be useful after the singularity? Or would every home > have a recycle machine? > > So don't worry about it post-singularity. Worry about the path to get > it going without waiting for the singularity. > > Besides, even post-singularity, at least shortly-post, you'll have > incrementally advanced stuff, which can help. Even godlike AIs - > especially the early generations - are constrained by physical reality > and can only move so fast. > > That's true, though the AIs are incredibly helpful. Open any one of them up and paste in the executive summary. See what it says. >> I suggest identifying some trivial, tiny piece that you can do on, > >> say, $100K-200K, and proposing that miniscule starting piece to the > >> Department of Energy SBIR program > > > > Maybe. This is related to renewable energy and you know how any project > related to that is doing. But then, maybe I should see if Trump would give > me a billion *not* to do it. > > Nah, pitch it as related to fossil fuels. It is, technically. > > I think that would be even worse. The official line is drill baby drill. > I have two or three organizations that have been bugging me to take > funding from them. But I doubt they would actually part with a dime > considering this project does not have a CEO, a management team, or even a > corporate structure.. > > Tch. Guys who say they'll fund you, until they get a good look at > you? Yeah, I've dealt with plenty of them. Their face people seem to > be paid purely by how many people they slam to their higher-ups > regardless of whether everyone knows that no sale is possible. That > is not the best incentive structure, but too many of those with money > won't trust their subordinates to think and qualify/curate leads. > > > I did that, worked for ten years or more on power satellites. Finally > gave up when the best I could do was 3 cents per kWh and PV solar got down > to 1.35 cents per kWh. The other problem was it took $60 B to get it > started. By comparison, SolarSyngas is a pittance. > > Eh. There's more money flowing into power sats these days. If you > might consider un-giving-up, you might check > https://ssi.org/solar-power-satellites/sps-news/ and look around for > anyone who's hiring or working on a design you like. > I am in contact with Paul Jaffe who I think knows about my low mass space > radiators. They may need them to cool big laser diodes. > Keith > __________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 04:49:44 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 21:49:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] why worse necessarily? In-Reply-To: References: <007501dd246a$c3fd65c0$4bf83140$@rainier66.com> <017201dd253d$5ffa87f0$1fef97d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <005501dd255f$00a4bce0$01ee36a0$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Subject: Re: [ExI] why worse necessarily? >?That's really interesting, Spike. >?Ponderosa pines are fire-resistant, with thick bark, to low-level fires that burn out the needles and undergrowth. The ones in Arizona forests often have burn scars every ten years or so? Ja, important observation Keith. The ponderosas in the forest all have burn scars, as ground fires go thru every few years, a natural thing. But? the neighborhood trees don?t have that blackened trunk, since fire doesn?t (ordinarily) go thru the residential areas. That means the neighborhood trees have combustible material all the way down to the ground, rather than a layer of charred bark on the lower 20 ft. Second: neighborhood trees have reduced competition and plenty of water, perfectly ideal growing conditions. Those trees that caused this catastrophe were all healthy trees (beetle infested trees are regularly identified and removed.) The remaining ponderosas (after the developer thinned them) had grown very tall in the 37 years that neighborhood was there. The residents knew they were a ticking timebomb. Some removed their pines, others did not. All burned and took about 400 homes with them. >? was looking at perhaps $2000 to take them down ? A neighborhood association raised money by donation to take down pines if the homeowner couldn?t afford it. My FIL, who doesn?t have a lot of money, kicked in several hundred bucks. The effort didn?t get enough of them down. >?Ponderosas are lovely trees; it is not hard to see why people want to live among them? That I will freely admit. I am a tree hugger myself. But in that setting, they need to come down. >?But they are definitely a fire hazard, though maybe not as bad as the eucalyptus that burned in the big Oakland fire? If one has never smelled the smoke from a eucalyptus grove, consider yourself lucky. Those things emit tear gas when they burn. I remember the Oakland fire well, oy vey. >?My brother lives downwind from a ponderosa forest in mostly juniper and oak. He knows the house is not likely to survive a forest fire, but he won't clear out the trees. It would ruin the view. Keith Best wishes to him. The easiest thing to do is nothing. Sometimes there are serious consequences. spike ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13695 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 04:53:34 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 21:53:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <005b01dd255f$89f79d50$9de6d7f0$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto >?Spike, would you know how to reach Elon's filter? Keith I have no contacts, but BillK is an expert in AI who knows how to effectively extract info from them. Keith do you have contact info for Eliezer? Good chance he would have ideas. I see Arel is on the cc. Greetings madam! Best wishes to you. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 05:08:35 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 22:08:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat ... Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto >...If you can get yourself to work on power satellites again, that's part of what SpaceX is apparently calling "Starmind". Granted, their focus is on powering orbiting AI satellites - but, again, spinoff. https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/8639247002 would be one place to start. ... Thx Adrian, I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with him, and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a trillion dollars. But I have heard from people who know, locals who work at Tesla, that the pace of life there and the other Musk companies would slay a man half my age. The pay is excellent I hear. I could be the richest man in the cemetery. But no, I hafta take care of family for now, and probably would pass on SpaceX even if I didn't have that responsibility. I will offer this one parting shot: I read thru the SpaceX business plan when it came out last month and consider major parts of it absurd. That Mars colony business, sheesh, how the hell are ya going to monetize THAT? Sell them warm woolen mittens and oxygen? Elton John was right: Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids. On the other hand... StarLink is GREAT! I use mine any time I go camping now. I am going to West Virginia in a coupla weeks to the ancestral homeland (Lincoln county and Logan county.) They still don't have internet back there in most places. I have genealogy collaborators back there who have no internet and no computer. We communicate with hand written letters. My most valuable contact has only dial up modem and his only computer is at his "office" which is the ranger station. I didn't buy any SpaceX stock, but might if it hits about 70 bucks. The StarLink segment alone is probably worth that much. spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 07:26:20 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 00:26:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <005b01dd255f$89f79d50$9de6d7f0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <005b01dd255f$89f79d50$9de6d7f0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:53?PM wrote: > *From:* Keith Henson > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto > > > > >?Spike, would you know how to reach Elon's filter? > > > Keith > > > I have no contacts, but BillK is an expert in AI who knows how to > effectively extract info from them. > > > > Keith do you have contact info for Eliezer? Good chance he would have > ideas. > I have his email, and I have pinged him about this subject. But I have not had an email from him since 2012. > > > I see Arel is on the cc. Greetings madam! Best wishes to you. > Arel says hi back and best wishes. We were both appalled at the story of your FIL being burned out Best wishes, Keith > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 15:05:48 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 08:05:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <005b01dd255f$89f79d50$9de6d7f0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00df01dd25b5$11104490$3330cdb0$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson ? Keith do you have contact info for Eliezer? Good chance he would have ideas. >?I have his email, and I have pinged him about this subject. But I have not had an email from him since 2012? Ja same here. He went behind closed doors about that timeframe, with that cryptic last-tear comment he posted here. It was about his efforts to influence AI developers in AI safety. As I recall his comment was something along the lines of ??I have wept my last tear for humanity?? After that, he didn?t post here again. ? >?Arel says hi back and best wishes. Keith my bride and I haver fond memories of the Pensfa parties at your place. I described Arel as the lady of infinite patience, for we are the biggest buncha yahoos you ever saw. (Tis true, ja? (tragic (but if we were not this way, SciFi would not be nearly as delightfully weird as it is.))) Arel would go with the program, visit with any normies who came along, such as my bride and Melanie Swan?s boyfriend for instance (fun deetz available on request.) Good times. >?We were both appalled at the story of your FIL being burned out Best wishes, Keith Meh, he is coping, as are we. I had an idea. There is one chair which he can get out of easier than the others, so I propped up a bunch of photo albums and his childhood stuff right there around his chair where he could see it. We saved stuff he didn?t even know he still had, such as a scrapbook his mother made of his first five years, back during the war. That scrapbook has survived two fires now, unscorched. We do not yet have digital images of that scrapbook. I will start on that project when I get back from West Virginia. I figure if AI decides to not kill us, it will likely discover how to upload us. This is really our only hope of long term ?survival? for we short-lived fast-burn carbon units are probably not smart enough to figure out how to upload us. If AI is friendly and aligned with humanity, then the digital images and ASCII files we make will allow us to bring some of our favorite things thru the great conflagration of this existence into the long-lived slow-burn virtual universe of the future. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 16:11:46 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 12:11:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 1:08?AM wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > ... > Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto > > >...If you can get yourself to work on power satellites again, that's part of what SpaceX is apparently calling "Starmind". Granted, their focus is on powering orbiting AI satellites - but, again, spinoff. > > https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/8639247002 would be one place to start. > > ... > > > Thx Adrian, I will pass on working for Elon. Fair enough. That was a suggestion for Keith. From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 16:28:04 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 12:28:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Adding Arel back on CC. (Hi, Keith's wife! Thank you for putting up with him and keeping him sane.) On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:00?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 2:56?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> >> Find a way to demonstrate it on prototype scale. >> > >> > Sigh, 100 tons-per-day gasifiers using plasma torches for heat have been done 20 years ago. The main difference here is using induction instead of high maintenance plasma torches. >> >> So demonstrate that. >> > It has been done, the plant ran for years in Canada. Yes, but not in your specific configuration. >> There's also, have YOUR SPECIFIC GASIFIERS been demonstrated? >> >> No. You personally have never operated a gasifier, I'd wager. You'd >> think that really really shouldn't matter - only the physics should >> matter. But when you get into that kind of money, the people and >> personal experience really really do matter...in the judgment of those >> with money, and they are the ones who get to set the rules, regardless >> of what should be the case. > > Agreed. Unfortunately the people who did run gasifiers, some at this scale are dead, the last coal gasifiers in the US were closed in the 1940s when town gas was replaced by natural gas. Come to think about it, that's not entirely true. There is a plant in North Dakota that gasifies 16000 tons of coal a day with oxygen and converts it to methane. It is a different process, burning much of the coal to make syngas. However, I am sure one of their engineers could be recruited to this project if it had serious resources. In fact, I know one of them through email. Maybe see if that person would be willing to consult if you did put in to demonstrate some tiny, incomplete prototype. Tens of thousands of dollars for a few hours' consulting, spread over months, can get some attention. >> > I am thinking of 2500 tons-per-day for a prototype. That's one part in 30 for what would be needed for Los Angeles. The AIs guess such a prototype would cost $200 to $300 million. >> >> So go down to 2.5 tons per day. I am not kidding. >> >> > At some point, a demonstration will not work because of scaling laws. Small devices have unfavorable surface to volume ratios. A 160 MW prototype is expected to leak at least 8 MW. >> >> So it would leak. That's fine, so long as it leaks in exactly the >> expected amount. The prototype is not expected to be practical for >> profitable operation. It is intended to demonstrate your claims (and, >> again, build up demonstrable personal experience) on a small budget. >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the estimated room), yes? Come up with a tiny little partial incomplete prototype that you can make for less than $200K - including paying yourself and anyone else you'd employ to make it. It can be done. If you swear that it can't, chop off features and scale down. It doesn't matter how far from the final version you get; it just has to be some incremental very first step to demonstrate that you can make and run a gasifier at all - or possibly, that you can at least design one. (SBIR Phase Is for hardware, where the production hardware will be large, often produce only schematics, with no actual hardware constructed until Phase II.) >> > Would this project be useful after the singularity? Or would every home have a recycle machine? >> >> So don't worry about it post-singularity. Worry about the path to get >> it going without waiting for the singularity. >> >> Besides, even post-singularity, at least shortly-post, you'll have >> incrementally advanced stuff, which can help. Even godlike AIs - >> especially the early generations - are constrained by physical reality >> and can only move so fast. >> > That's true, though the AIs are incredibly helpful. Open any one of them up and paste in the executive summary. See what it says. Oh, absolutely. But that's today's AIs, not post-singularity ones. And you absolutely are allowed to use AIs in SBIR-funded work - in fact, some routes practically expect it - so long as you manually review what they produce and correct any errors they make. As a first step, they can help you make a proposal to this funding source. >> >> I suggest identifying some trivial, tiny piece that you can do on, >> >> say, $100K-200K, and proposing that miniscule starting piece to the >> >> Department of Energy SBIR program >> > >> > Maybe. This is related to renewable energy and you know how any project related to that is doing. But then, maybe I should see if Trump would give me a billion *not* to do it. >> >> Nah, pitch it as related to fossil fuels. It is, technically. >> > I think that would be even worse. The official line is drill baby drill. Nah. They're up for processing improvements, too. I speak as someone who has had DOE-funded research in the past couple of years. Trust me, you can apply. You won't be arrested or face any other such backlash just for applying. (You do have to register in certain government databases, most notably sam.gov, but if you're worried about certain enemies you've picked up, they don't have access to these databases - and if they ever do go after you while you're working a government contract, you can spin it that those enemies just attacked the US government's work.) > I am in contact with Paul Jaffe who I think knows about my low mass space radiators. They may need them to cool big laser diodes. Ask him if he knows anyone who's hiring, perhaps. But I wouldn't stop at asking only him. Check https://ssi.org/solar-power-satellites/sps-news/ too if you might want to consider getting back into solar power satellites. (And that link for SpaceX's hiring, if you might stomach working for them - though I know that might not be palatable, mainly because I suspect you would have to move to their location.) From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 6 16:35:08 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 09:35:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] spacex job board, was: RE: Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <010f01dd25c1$8bc062e0$a34128a0$@rainier66.com> ...> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 1:08?AM wrote: ... >>... Thx Adrian, I will pass on working for Elon. >...Fair enough. That was a suggestion for Keith. _______________________________________________ Good. Sounds like anything that might be in my specialty are problems SpaceX has already solved. When they started landing boosters on dry ground feet first, it was clear they had solved the engineering problems we realized were solvable back in the early 90s. I have two associates who went to Florida to work at SpaceX. They both said it was a grueling pace compared to the Lazy L Ranch. spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 18:14:30 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 11:14:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Adding Arel back on CC. (Hi, Keith's wife! Thank you for putting up > with him and keeping him sane.) > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > snip > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. > > Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the > estimated room), yes? > > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters taking about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas flows upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste along with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this down to 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? Some things just don't scale down. Power satellites don't scale down either if you are using microwaves to get the power down. Paul Jaffe's group is proposing to use lasers and existing solar farms. That might work, but I can see show stopper problems with it. Keith > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 19:06:11 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 15:06:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. >> >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the >> estimated room), yes? >> > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters taking about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas flows upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste along with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this down to 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these projects? ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it came up with the answer below. You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - until you have the basics of something you can submit. > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: > > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. > > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: > > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" > > Those are very different goals. > > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry > > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft becomes 35 cm. > > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead of an hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation losses, Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. > > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce meaningful engineering data. > > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. > > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. > > For example: > > residence time > gas composition > gas temperature > heat flux l> iquid iron chemistry > gas velocity > oxygen potential > feedstock characteristics > > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity parameters. > > ________________________________ > > Break the problem into separate technical risks > > Looking at his description: > > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. > > There are actually several independent questions. > > Risk 1 > > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? > > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of molten iron. > > Not 200 tons. > > ________________________________ > > Risk 2 > > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? > > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. > > You need to show that: > > incoming waste dries > pyrolyzes > preheats > outgoing gas cools as expected > > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few meters tall. > > ________________________________ > > Risk 3 > > What is the syngas quality? > > Measure > > H? > CO > CO? > CH? > tar > particulates > sulfur > chlorine > > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. > > ________________________________ > > Risk 4 > > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? > > Measure > > carbon pickup > slag formation > corrosion > refractory wear > > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. > > ________________________________ > > What would a Phase I actually look like? > > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: > > Task 1 > > Thermodynamic modeling. > > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. > > Predict equilibrium chemistry. > > ________________________________ > > Task 2 > > CFD/heat transfer modeling. > > Demonstrate expected residence time. > > Optimize geometry. > > ________________________________ > > Task 3 > > Bench reactor. > > Instead of municipal waste, > > start with > > wood chips > RDF pellets > paper > plastics > > All well-characterized. > > ________________________________ > > Task 4 > > Small molten metal reactor. > > Perhaps > > 30?50 kg molten iron > induction heated > batch operation > > Run dozens of experiments. > > ________________________________ > > Task 5 > > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. > > If they match within reasonable error, > > that's a successful Phase I. > > Notice: > > None of this proves commercial economics. > > That's okay. > > Phase I usually isn't expected to. > > ________________________________ > > Phase II > > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. > > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... > > perhaps > > 2?5 tons. > > Instead of > > 5 kg/hr feed... > > perhaps > > 100?500 kg/hr. > > Now you're validating: > > continuous operation > automation > refractory life > maintenance > slag removal > gas cleanup > energy balance > > Still nowhere near commercial. > > But now investors and DOE have confidence. > > ________________________________ > > The 35-meter issue > > His biggest objection appears to be: > > "My process depends on an hour of falling." > > That's actually testable. > > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are multiple ways to achieve it. > > For example: > > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow > staged hoppers > baffles > moving-bed reactor geometry > screw conveyors > oscillating shelves > > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. > > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. > > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. > > ________________________________ > > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about > > Suppose his commercialization plan is: > > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." > > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: > > "Where's your $400M pilot?" > > Instead they'll ask questions such as: > > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? > Does the measured syngas match predictions? > Are tar levels acceptably low? > Is carbon conversion high? > Is refractory degradation manageable? > Does the energy balance close? > Can the process operate continuously? > What are the major scale-up risks? > > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is intended to do. > > One additional suggestion > > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in Phase I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. For example: > > exceptionally high carbon conversion, > unusually clean syngas, > superior heat recovery, > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. > > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, instrumented test article and supported by modeling that projects to commercial scale, the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers generally understand that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a commercial-scale facility?they're looking for convincing evidence that the core innovation works and that the path to Phase II is technically credible. I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more than legit. From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 22:36:53 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 23:36:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Life Originated Twice on Earth Message-ID: Life Originated Twice on Earth New research traces the origins of our metabolism back in time By Jake Currie August 6, 2026 Quote: As they transitioned from leaning on their environments to metabolize energy to become more self-sufficient, bacteria and archaea each evolved their own new enzymes to replace the metals in these reactions. ?The new data leave only one conclusion,? Martin said. ?The bacteria and archaeal lineages made the transition to the free-living state independently. Only free-living cells are alive. Let?s call it by name: We are looking at one origin of the genetic code, but two origins of life.? ------------------------ I wondered where humans came from. BillK According to Qwen-3.8 Max Thinking: Genetically and evolutionarily, the "core" information-processing machinery of eukaryotic cells (how we read, copy, and repair DNA) comes directly from Archaea. However, our cellular energy factories (mitochondria) and many of our metabolic processes come from Bacteria. So, while our primary cellular lineage belongs to the Archaea, every human, animal, plant, and fungus is essentially a successful, ancient hybrid of both domains! ------------------------------ From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 08:21:47 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 01:21:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You are probably right that a pilot could be scaled way down. There are aspects that will not scale down very far, like one of the positive points is unsorted MSW. A queen-sized bed is not going to go into a relatively small diameter gasifier. In fact, the feed will likely need to be ground up. Making the feed representative of unsorted feed may be difficult. Minor drawback. The AI and I concluded that with an 8-meter shaft, we would not get bridging. That may be a problem in a scaled-down version. Not sure how or if there should be compensation for this. You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain unless the test is remote. I suspect the scaled-down version will not have enough area to make the steam it needs. The full-scale version needs a good model of superheated steam production, and we will need to consider how to compensate for a small version. The induction heater at the bottom might be adapted from a standard 200 kW melting furnace. This might save considerable money, but maybe not. Provisions to drain off slag and metals without tipping the melting pot will have to be designed. This is a relatively smaller problem at full scale. The airlock at the top of the gasifier needs to be considered as well. I don't know if blast furnace airlocks can be scaled down this far or if it is a concern for a small pilot. I added Jim Stonecipher to the list. He had a grim experience with scaling up a pilot plant. I don't know if he would be interested in doing it again, but knowing some of the pitfalls,I think he would be well-suited for this project. The initial stage of this project, where the syngas is used as a high-capacity, long-duration battery, is a lot less complicated than taking the syngas all the way to liquid fuel. The gas would still have to be cleaned to turbine specifications, whatever that is. What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well beyond. Any ideas? Take it away, folks. Keith On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 12:07?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. > >> > >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the > >> estimated room), yes? > >> > > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters taking > about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas flows > upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste along > with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this down to > 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? > > So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these projects? > > ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally > quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed > out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to > find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it > came up with the answer below. > > You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's > there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping > on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off > it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" > and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - > until you have the basics of something you can submit. > > > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: > > > > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. > > > > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: > > > > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough > technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" > > > > Those are very different goals. > > > > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry > > > > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft becomes > 35 cm. > > > > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead of an > hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation losses, > Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. > > > > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce > meaningful engineering data. > > > > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. > > > > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. > > > > For example: > > > > residence time > > gas composition > > gas temperature > > heat flux > l> iquid iron chemistry > > gas velocity > > oxygen potential > > feedstock characteristics > > > > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity parameters. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Break the problem into separate technical risks > > > > Looking at his description: > > > > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. > > > > There are actually several independent questions. > > > > Risk 1 > > > > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? > > > > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of molten > iron. > > > > Not 200 tons. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Risk 2 > > > > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? > > > > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. > > > > You need to show that: > > > > incoming waste dries > > pyrolyzes > > preheats > > outgoing gas cools as expected > > > > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few > meters tall. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Risk 3 > > > > What is the syngas quality? > > > > Measure > > > > H? > > CO > > CO? > > CH? > > tar > > particulates > > sulfur > > chlorine > > > > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Risk 4 > > > > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? > > > > Measure > > > > carbon pickup > > slag formation > > corrosion > > refractory wear > > > > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > What would a Phase I actually look like? > > > > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: > > > > Task 1 > > > > Thermodynamic modeling. > > > > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. > > > > Predict equilibrium chemistry. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Task 2 > > > > CFD/heat transfer modeling. > > > > Demonstrate expected residence time. > > > > Optimize geometry. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Task 3 > > > > Bench reactor. > > > > Instead of municipal waste, > > > > start with > > > > wood chips > > RDF pellets > > paper > > plastics > > > > All well-characterized. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Task 4 > > > > Small molten metal reactor. > > > > Perhaps > > > > 30?50 kg molten iron > > induction heated > > batch operation > > > > Run dozens of experiments. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Task 5 > > > > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. > > > > If they match within reasonable error, > > > > that's a successful Phase I. > > > > Notice: > > > > None of this proves commercial economics. > > > > That's okay. > > > > Phase I usually isn't expected to. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Phase II > > > > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. > > > > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... > > > > perhaps > > > > 2?5 tons. > > > > Instead of > > > > 5 kg/hr feed... > > > > perhaps > > > > 100?500 kg/hr. > > > > Now you're validating: > > > > continuous operation > > automation > > refractory life > > maintenance > > slag removal > > gas cleanup > > energy balance > > > > Still nowhere near commercial. > > > > But now investors and DOE have confidence. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > The 35-meter issue > > > > His biggest objection appears to be: > > > > "My process depends on an hour of falling." > > > > That's actually testable. > > > > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are multiple > ways to achieve it. > > > > For example: > > > > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow > > staged hoppers > > baffles > > moving-bed reactor geometry > > screw conveyors > > oscillating shelves > > > > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. > > > > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. > > > > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about > > > > Suppose his commercialization plan is: > > > > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." > > > > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: > > > > "Where's your $400M pilot?" > > > > Instead they'll ask questions such as: > > > > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? > > Does the measured syngas match predictions? > > Are tar levels acceptably low? > > Is carbon conversion high? > > Is refractory degradation manageable? > > Does the energy balance close? > > Can the process operate continuously? > > What are the major scale-up risks? > > > > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the > remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is > intended to do. > > > > One additional suggestion > > > > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in Phase > I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk > technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. > For example: > > > > exceptionally high carbon conversion, > > unusually clean syngas, > > superior heat recovery, > > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. > > > > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, instrumented > test article and supported by modeling that projects to commercial scale, > the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers generally understand > that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a commercial-scale facility?they're > looking for convincing evidence that the core innovation works and that the > path to Phase II is technically credible. > > I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might > be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more > than legit. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 11:12:55 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 07:12:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: *> I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with him, > and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a trillion > dollars.* *If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have spent $291 million to get the most anti-libertarian President in American history reelected. And I would NOT have created DOGE and made a fool of myself by claiming it would save the government $2 TRILLION A YEAR when it ended up doing little except to increase the stockpile of government chaos, which we already had a sufficient amount of. * *And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at the time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire in 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had used that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in the rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis.* *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.ticozzi at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 12:01:57 2026 From: stefano.ticozzi at gmail.com (Stefano Ticozzi) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:01:57 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: In my humble opinion, the whole ?if I was a trillionaire? argument doesn?t make much sense. Musk became a trillionaire thanks to his unique skills. He?s eccentric and obviously makes mistakes but he has also accomplished a great deal and has often seen things before others did. stefano Il ven 7 ago 2026, 13:14 John Clark via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> ha scritto: > spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > > *> I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with >> him, and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a >> trillion dollars.* > > > *If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have spent $291 million to get the > most anti-libertarian President in American history reelected. And I would > NOT have created DOGE and made a fool of myself by claiming it would save > the government $2 TRILLION A YEAR when it ended up doing little except to > increase the stockpile of government chaos, which we already had a > sufficient amount of. * > > *And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at the > time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire in > 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had used > that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in the > rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. > Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 > billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy > theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis.* > > *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 Fri Aug 7 12:18:51 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:18:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Life Originated Twice on Earth In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) existed between 3.5 and 4.2 billion years ago. LUCA was probably not the first living thing, but probably was the first to use DNA as its genetic code, before LUCA life probably used RNA. If there were other independent lines of inheritance besides LUCA they're not very important because a very long time ago they all went extinct. More advanced eukaryotic cells like we are made out of evolved about 2 billion years ago when an ancient archaeon microbe engulfed an energy producing oxygen-using bacteria which, because of a symbiotic relationship, evolved into a mitochondria. And life you could actually see without using a microscope only came into existence 500 million years ago. And life was only able to make a radio telescope about a century ago. * *That's one reason I think we are the first. The other is that the universe has obviously not been engineered. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 12:35:14 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:35:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Let it be said, with SpaceX's post-IPO price drop, Musk is no longer a trillionaire - and arguably never actually was: he wasn't selling his shares in the period where they would have gained that much money. That said, his skills as an engineer (and engineering manager) aren't what made most of his money. His skills at getting other people to pay a high price for what he paid a low price appear to be the primary source of his wealth; those skills aren't that uncommon, but he appears to have gotten lucky in exercising them. On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 8:03?AM Stefano Ticozzi via extropy-chat wrote: > > In my humble opinion, the whole ?if I was a trillionaire? argument doesn?t make much sense. Musk became a trillionaire thanks to his unique skills. He?s eccentric and obviously makes mistakes but he has also accomplished a great deal and has often seen things before others did. > > stefano > > > Il ven 7 ago 2026, 13:14 John Clark via extropy-chat ha scritto: >> >> spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: >> >>> > I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with him, and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a trillion dollars. >> >> >> If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have spent $291 million to get the most anti-libertarian President in American history reelected. And I would NOT have created DOGE and made a fool of myself by claiming it would save the government $2 TRILLION A YEAR when it ended up doing little except to increase the stockpile of government chaos, which we already had a sufficient amount of. >> >> And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at the time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire in 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had used that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in the rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis. >> >> John K Clark >> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 12:43:03 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:43:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 8:02?AM Stefano Ticozzi wrote: *> In my humble opinion, the whole ?if I was a trillionaire? argument > doesn?t make much sense. Musk became a trillionaire thanks to his unique > skills. He?s eccentric and obviously makes mistakes but he has also > accomplished a great deal and has often seen things before others did.* > *Unlike the current President of the United States Elon Musk is neither an imbecile nor an ignoramus, he is a very intelligent man, but he is not as intelligent as he thinks he is; at times he has demonstrated very bad judgment. And Musk has some very serious character flaws which is concerning because he is the richest man in the world. * *John K Clark * > stefano > > Il ven 7 ago 2026, 13:14 John Clark via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> ha scritto: > >> spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: >> >> *> I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with >>> him, and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a >>> trillion dollars.* >> >> >> *If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have spent $291 million to get the >> most anti-libertarian President in American history reelected. And I would >> NOT have created DOGE and made a fool of myself by claiming it would save >> the government $2 TRILLION A YEAR when it ended up doing little except to >> increase the stockpile of government chaos, which we already had a >> sufficient amount of. * >> >> *And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at >> the time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire >> in 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had >> used that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in >> the rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. >> Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 >> billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy >> theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis.* >> >> *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 Fri Aug 7 12:46:05 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:46:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Four Top Google A.I. Researchers Form New Start-Up Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Four Top Google A.I. Researchers Form New Start-Up Jeff Dean, who for years was one of Google?s most important executives, is leading the new artificial intelligence company with the backing of Google. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/05/technology/google-researchers-ai-startup.html?unlocked_article_code=1.3lA.yfe3.8FoeafwzC3Dq&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 12:56:41 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:56:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well beyond. Any ideas? I have one. Pardon my language, but frack your fear and just apply. The worst they'll do is say no. Applying doesn't take that much effort, and no money - so in the worst case you'll have wasted some time and that's it. I have been down this path so I know exactly what I am talking about here. It really is that simple. Also, a detailed analysis of the evidence they have given as to how they think about it suggests they do NOT view this as renewables: They haven't released the full Phase I for this year yet. They say they plan to later this year, so you may be waiting a few months (especially if the government does partially shut down in October again, but fortunately Congress appears to be on track - so far - to avert that this time). The last SBIR funding was back in 2024. But you can look at materials from back then to start getting a proposal together. Take a look at https://science.osti.gov/-/media/sbir/pdf/funding/2025/2025-Phase-I-Release-2-Topics-V8-01-14-2025.pdf . I think your research may fall under the former topic C60-20/g: Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage/Other. Maybe you'll find another topic that better fits. They have reorganized SBIRs, moving them to a different office. See https://www.energy.gov/technologycommercialization/doe-small-business-innovation-research-sbir-and-small-business . They've only released for updated Phase IIs (which applies to my work, and we have started preparing an application) so far - they've got Genesis mission Phase Is (which don't apply to you) out so far, with plans to release other Phase Is (which would apply to you) later. But looking at https://sbir-sttr.connectwerx.org/portfolio-items/598/ - just to get the topic areas (that page lists the Phase IIs, which you don't yet qualify for but indicates their probable thinking about Phase Is) - it appears they are rebranding the group of things including everything under "Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage" into a new Topic Area 4. (Don't worry about that page listing C58 vs. the above PDF listing C60. The actual topic is what matters.) Notice that solar and wind - the traditional "renewables" - have been lumped into Topic Area 6. If you'd be Topic Area 4, which they say "aims to unleash the full potential of America?s hydrocarbon and geothermal resources", then by their own bureaucratic logic, you're not renewables. On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:22?AM Keith Henson wrote: > > You are probably right that a pilot could be scaled way down. > > There are aspects that will not scale down very far, like one of the positive points is unsorted MSW. A queen-sized bed is not going to go into a relatively small diameter gasifier. In fact, the feed will likely need to be ground up. Making the feed representative of unsorted feed may be difficult. Minor drawback. The AI and I concluded that with an 8-meter shaft, we would not get bridging. That may be a problem in a scaled-down version. Not sure how or if there should be compensation for this. > > You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain unless the test is remote. > > I suspect the scaled-down version will not have enough area to make the steam it needs. The full-scale version needs a good model of superheated steam production, and we will need to consider how to compensate for a small version. > > The induction heater at the bottom might be adapted from a standard 200 kW melting furnace. This might save considerable money, but maybe not. Provisions to drain off slag and metals without tipping the melting pot will have to be designed. This is a relatively smaller problem at full scale. > > The airlock at the top of the gasifier needs to be considered as well. I don't know if blast furnace airlocks can be scaled down this far or if it is a concern for a small pilot. > > I added Jim Stonecipher to the list. He had a grim experience with scaling up a pilot plant. I don't know if he would be interested in doing it again, but knowing some of the pitfalls,I think he would be well-suited for this project. The initial stage of this project, where the syngas is used as a high-capacity, long-duration battery, is a lot less complicated than taking the syngas all the way to liquid fuel. The gas would still have to be cleaned to turbine specifications, whatever that is. > > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well beyond. Any ideas? > > Take it away, folks. > > Keith > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 12:07?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. >> >> >> >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the >> >> estimated room), yes? >> >> >> > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters taking about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas flows upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste along with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this down to 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? >> >> So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these projects? >> >> ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally >> quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed >> out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to >> find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it >> came up with the answer below. >> >> You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's >> there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping >> on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off >> it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" >> and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - >> until you have the basics of something you can submit. >> >> > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: >> > >> > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. >> > >> > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: >> > >> > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" >> > >> > Those are very different goals. >> > >> > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry >> > >> > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft becomes 35 cm. >> > >> > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead of an hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation losses, Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. >> > >> > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce meaningful engineering data. >> > >> > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. >> > >> > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. >> > >> > For example: >> > >> > residence time >> > gas composition >> > gas temperature >> > heat flux >> l> iquid iron chemistry >> > gas velocity >> > oxygen potential >> > feedstock characteristics >> > >> > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity parameters. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Break the problem into separate technical risks >> > >> > Looking at his description: >> > >> > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. >> > >> > There are actually several independent questions. >> > >> > Risk 1 >> > >> > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? >> > >> > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of molten iron. >> > >> > Not 200 tons. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Risk 2 >> > >> > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? >> > >> > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. >> > >> > You need to show that: >> > >> > incoming waste dries >> > pyrolyzes >> > preheats >> > outgoing gas cools as expected >> > >> > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few meters tall. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Risk 3 >> > >> > What is the syngas quality? >> > >> > Measure >> > >> > H? >> > CO >> > CO? >> > CH? >> > tar >> > particulates >> > sulfur >> > chlorine >> > >> > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Risk 4 >> > >> > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? >> > >> > Measure >> > >> > carbon pickup >> > slag formation >> > corrosion >> > refractory wear >> > >> > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > What would a Phase I actually look like? >> > >> > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: >> > >> > Task 1 >> > >> > Thermodynamic modeling. >> > >> > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. >> > >> > Predict equilibrium chemistry. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Task 2 >> > >> > CFD/heat transfer modeling. >> > >> > Demonstrate expected residence time. >> > >> > Optimize geometry. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Task 3 >> > >> > Bench reactor. >> > >> > Instead of municipal waste, >> > >> > start with >> > >> > wood chips >> > RDF pellets >> > paper >> > plastics >> > >> > All well-characterized. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Task 4 >> > >> > Small molten metal reactor. >> > >> > Perhaps >> > >> > 30?50 kg molten iron >> > induction heated >> > batch operation >> > >> > Run dozens of experiments. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Task 5 >> > >> > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. >> > >> > If they match within reasonable error, >> > >> > that's a successful Phase I. >> > >> > Notice: >> > >> > None of this proves commercial economics. >> > >> > That's okay. >> > >> > Phase I usually isn't expected to. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Phase II >> > >> > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. >> > >> > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... >> > >> > perhaps >> > >> > 2?5 tons. >> > >> > Instead of >> > >> > 5 kg/hr feed... >> > >> > perhaps >> > >> > 100?500 kg/hr. >> > >> > Now you're validating: >> > >> > continuous operation >> > automation >> > refractory life >> > maintenance >> > slag removal >> > gas cleanup >> > energy balance >> > >> > Still nowhere near commercial. >> > >> > But now investors and DOE have confidence. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > The 35-meter issue >> > >> > His biggest objection appears to be: >> > >> > "My process depends on an hour of falling." >> > >> > That's actually testable. >> > >> > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are multiple ways to achieve it. >> > >> > For example: >> > >> > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow >> > staged hoppers >> > baffles >> > moving-bed reactor geometry >> > screw conveyors >> > oscillating shelves >> > >> > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. >> > >> > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. >> > >> > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about >> > >> > Suppose his commercialization plan is: >> > >> > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." >> > >> > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: >> > >> > "Where's your $400M pilot?" >> > >> > Instead they'll ask questions such as: >> > >> > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? >> > Does the measured syngas match predictions? >> > Are tar levels acceptably low? >> > Is carbon conversion high? >> > Is refractory degradation manageable? >> > Does the energy balance close? >> > Can the process operate continuously? >> > What are the major scale-up risks? >> > >> > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is intended to do. >> > >> > One additional suggestion >> > >> > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in Phase I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. For example: >> > >> > exceptionally high carbon conversion, >> > unusually clean syngas, >> > superior heat recovery, >> > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. >> > >> > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, instrumented test article and supported by modeling that projects to commercial scale, the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers generally understand that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a commercial-scale facility?they're looking for convincing evidence that the core innovation works and that the path to Phase II is technically credible. >> >> I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might >> be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more >> than legit. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 13:16:04 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 09:16:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This A.I. Just Created Viruses Not Found in Nature Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. This A.I. Just Created Viruses Not Found in Nature Scientists trained artificial intelligence on libraries of DNA and then asked the model to create recipes for viral genomes. Sixteen of them were viable, yielding new viruses. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/06/science/ai-viruses-bacteria-arc.html?unlocked_article_code=1.3lA.N9Ic.5v_CVJ8VAtlp&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 15:43:28 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:43:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto >?You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain unless the test is remote... Any ideas? Keith Keith, Spokane Washington has a garbage incinerator. I personally watched them shovel mountains of garbage in there, separating only the steel (with an enormous magnet.) They somehow catalyze the exhaust gas down to carbon dioxide and water in that reaction. I recognize there are environmentalists who oppose incinerators and environmentalists who favor them, but both of those gases appear to me to be beneficial when added to the atmosphere. Could not your notion do likewise? This virtual tour partially explains the catalyst process with anhydrous ammonia and slurry scrubbers (bonus: the young lady presenting it walks very fast (in a mysteriously provocative way)): https://vimeo.com/492273515?fl=pl &fe=cm spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 15:50:15 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:50:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto spike jones via extropy-chat > wrote: > I will pass on working for Elon. I have no personal heartburn with him, and see that he is doing all the things we would do if we owned a trillion dollars. If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have ?spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter?. John K Clark Twitter was going to fail had not Elon saved it. Now, Twitter is the world?s free speech town hall. It?s has replaced commercial news with a commercial-free alternative. What?s not to like about that? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 15:58:53 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:58:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00fa01dd2685$a57d96c0$f078c440$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >? Elon Musk is neither an imbecile nor an ignoramus, he is a very intelligent man, but he is not as intelligent as he thinks he is; at times he has demonstrated very bad judgment. And Musk has some very serious character flaws which is concerning because he is the richest man in the world. John K Clark Meh, so don?t buy his stuff. That was easy. There are alternatives to TwitterX, such as Bluesky (it still exists (I get references to it on TwitterX.)) I don?t know right off hand what is the alternative to StarLink, but we somehow got along without universal mobile internet before and can do so now if you wish. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 16:40:48 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 09:40:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no credibility. So the first order of business might be to recruit someone with those skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any ideas? That might overlap with raising a small amount of money to do a video and incorporating SolarSyngas. With modern tools like GoFundMe or Kickstarter, that might or might not be within what I could do. I wrote the script and produced a video, "Beamed Energy Bootstrapping," just before I gave up on power satellites. And I wrote the fundraising letter that brought in about $60k from the L5 Society membership for the opposition to the Moon Treaty. I still remember the pain in my hand from signing 600 thank-you letters. That was both a long, long time ago and a very different situation where I had a good pitch to a group of highly motivated people. This is different. I have no connection to any of the groups that might be interested in a project like this. Again, ideas are welcome. Keith On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:56?AM Adrian Tymes wrote: > > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels > as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no > idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well > beyond. Any ideas? > > I have one. > > Pardon my language, but frack your fear and just apply. > > The worst they'll do is say no. Applying doesn't take that much > effort, and no money - so in the worst case you'll have wasted some > time and that's it. I have been down this path so I know exactly what > I am talking about here. > > It really is that simple. > > Also, a detailed analysis of the evidence they have given as to how > they think about it suggests they do NOT view this as renewables: > > They haven't released the full Phase I for this year yet. They say > they plan to later this year, so you may be waiting a few months > (especially if the government does partially shut down in October > again, but fortunately Congress appears to be on track - so far - to > avert that this time). The last SBIR funding was back in 2024. But > you can look at materials from back then to start getting a proposal > together. > > Take a look at > https://science.osti.gov/-/media/sbir/pdf/funding/2025/2025-Phase-I-Release-2-Topics-V8-01-14-2025.pdf > . I think your research may fall under the former topic C60-20/g: > Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage/Other. Maybe you'll find > another topic that better fits. > > They have reorganized SBIRs, moving them to a different office. See > > https://www.energy.gov/technologycommercialization/doe-small-business-innovation-research-sbir-and-small-business > . They've only released for updated Phase IIs (which applies to my > work, and we have started preparing an application) so far - they've > got Genesis mission Phase Is (which don't apply to you) out so far, > with plans to release other Phase Is (which would apply to you) later. > > But looking at https://sbir-sttr.connectwerx.org/portfolio-items/598/ > - just to get the topic areas (that page lists the Phase IIs, which > you don't yet qualify for but indicates their probable thinking about > Phase Is) - it appears they are rebranding the group of things > including everything under "Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage" > into a new Topic Area 4. (Don't worry about that page listing C58 vs. > the above PDF listing C60. The actual topic is what matters.) > > Notice that solar and wind - the traditional "renewables" - have been > lumped into Topic Area 6. If you'd be Topic Area 4, which they say > "aims to unleash the full potential of America?s hydrocarbon and > geothermal resources", then by their own bureaucratic logic, you're > not renewables. > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:22?AM Keith Henson > wrote: > > > > You are probably right that a pilot could be scaled way down. > > > > There are aspects that will not scale down very far, like one of the > positive points is unsorted MSW. A queen-sized bed is not going to go into > a relatively small diameter gasifier. In fact, the feed will likely need to > be ground up. Making the feed representative of unsorted feed may be > difficult. Minor drawback. The AI and I concluded that with an 8-meter > shaft, we would not get bridging. That may be a problem in a scaled-down > version. Not sure how or if there should be compensation for this. > > > > You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable > way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative > feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you > may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins > (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain > unless the test is remote. > > > > I suspect the scaled-down version will not have enough area to make the > steam it needs. The full-scale version needs a good model of superheated > steam production, and we will need to consider how to compensate for a > small version. > > > > The induction heater at the bottom might be adapted from a standard 200 > kW melting furnace. This might save considerable money, but maybe not. > Provisions to drain off slag and metals without tipping the melting pot > will have to be designed. This is a relatively smaller problem at full > scale. > > > > The airlock at the top of the gasifier needs to be considered as well. I > don't know if blast furnace airlocks can be scaled down this far or if it > is a concern for a small pilot. > > > > I added Jim Stonecipher to the list. He had a grim experience with > scaling up a pilot plant. I don't know if he would be interested in doing > it again, but knowing some of the pitfalls,I think he would be well-suited > for this project. The initial stage of this project, where the syngas is > used as a high-capacity, long-duration battery, is a lot less complicated > than taking the syngas all the way to liquid fuel. The gas would still have > to be cleaned to turbine specifications, whatever that is. > > > > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels > as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no > idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well > beyond. Any ideas? > > > > Take it away, folks. > > > > Keith > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 12:07?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > >> >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. > >> >> > >> >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the > >> >> estimated room), yes? > >> >> > >> > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters taking > about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas flows > upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste along > with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this down to > 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? > >> > >> So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these > projects? > >> > >> ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally > >> quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed > >> out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to > >> find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it > >> came up with the answer below. > >> > >> You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's > >> there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping > >> on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off > >> it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" > >> and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - > >> until you have the basics of something you can submit. > >> > >> > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: > >> > > >> > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. > >> > > >> > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: > >> > > >> > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough > technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" > >> > > >> > Those are very different goals. > >> > > >> > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry > >> > > >> > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft > becomes 35 cm. > >> > > >> > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead of > an hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation losses, > Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. > >> > > >> > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce > meaningful engineering data. > >> > > >> > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. > >> > > >> > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. > >> > > >> > For example: > >> > > >> > residence time > >> > gas composition > >> > gas temperature > >> > heat flux > >> l> iquid iron chemistry > >> > gas velocity > >> > oxygen potential > >> > feedstock characteristics > >> > > >> > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity > parameters. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Break the problem into separate technical risks > >> > > >> > Looking at his description: > >> > > >> > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. > >> > > >> > There are actually several independent questions. > >> > > >> > Risk 1 > >> > > >> > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? > >> > > >> > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of > molten iron. > >> > > >> > Not 200 tons. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Risk 2 > >> > > >> > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? > >> > > >> > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. > >> > > >> > You need to show that: > >> > > >> > incoming waste dries > >> > pyrolyzes > >> > preheats > >> > outgoing gas cools as expected > >> > > >> > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few > meters tall. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Risk 3 > >> > > >> > What is the syngas quality? > >> > > >> > Measure > >> > > >> > H? > >> > CO > >> > CO? > >> > CH? > >> > tar > >> > particulates > >> > sulfur > >> > chlorine > >> > > >> > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Risk 4 > >> > > >> > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? > >> > > >> > Measure > >> > > >> > carbon pickup > >> > slag formation > >> > corrosion > >> > refractory wear > >> > > >> > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > What would a Phase I actually look like? > >> > > >> > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: > >> > > >> > Task 1 > >> > > >> > Thermodynamic modeling. > >> > > >> > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. > >> > > >> > Predict equilibrium chemistry. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Task 2 > >> > > >> > CFD/heat transfer modeling. > >> > > >> > Demonstrate expected residence time. > >> > > >> > Optimize geometry. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Task 3 > >> > > >> > Bench reactor. > >> > > >> > Instead of municipal waste, > >> > > >> > start with > >> > > >> > wood chips > >> > RDF pellets > >> > paper > >> > plastics > >> > > >> > All well-characterized. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Task 4 > >> > > >> > Small molten metal reactor. > >> > > >> > Perhaps > >> > > >> > 30?50 kg molten iron > >> > induction heated > >> > batch operation > >> > > >> > Run dozens of experiments. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Task 5 > >> > > >> > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. > >> > > >> > If they match within reasonable error, > >> > > >> > that's a successful Phase I. > >> > > >> > Notice: > >> > > >> > None of this proves commercial economics. > >> > > >> > That's okay. > >> > > >> > Phase I usually isn't expected to. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > Phase II > >> > > >> > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. > >> > > >> > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... > >> > > >> > perhaps > >> > > >> > 2?5 tons. > >> > > >> > Instead of > >> > > >> > 5 kg/hr feed... > >> > > >> > perhaps > >> > > >> > 100?500 kg/hr. > >> > > >> > Now you're validating: > >> > > >> > continuous operation > >> > automation > >> > refractory life > >> > maintenance > >> > slag removal > >> > gas cleanup > >> > energy balance > >> > > >> > Still nowhere near commercial. > >> > > >> > But now investors and DOE have confidence. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > The 35-meter issue > >> > > >> > His biggest objection appears to be: > >> > > >> > "My process depends on an hour of falling." > >> > > >> > That's actually testable. > >> > > >> > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are multiple > ways to achieve it. > >> > > >> > For example: > >> > > >> > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow > >> > staged hoppers > >> > baffles > >> > moving-bed reactor geometry > >> > screw conveyors > >> > oscillating shelves > >> > > >> > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. > >> > > >> > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. > >> > > >> > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. > >> > > >> > ________________________________ > >> > > >> > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about > >> > > >> > Suppose his commercialization plan is: > >> > > >> > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." > >> > > >> > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: > >> > > >> > "Where's your $400M pilot?" > >> > > >> > Instead they'll ask questions such as: > >> > > >> > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? > >> > Does the measured syngas match predictions? > >> > Are tar levels acceptably low? > >> > Is carbon conversion high? > >> > Is refractory degradation manageable? > >> > Does the energy balance close? > >> > Can the process operate continuously? > >> > What are the major scale-up risks? > >> > > >> > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the > remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is > intended to do. > >> > > >> > One additional suggestion > >> > > >> > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in > Phase I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk > technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. > For example: > >> > > >> > exceptionally high carbon conversion, > >> > unusually clean syngas, > >> > superior heat recovery, > >> > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. > >> > > >> > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, instrumented > test article and supported by modeling that projects to commercial scale, > the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers generally understand > that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a commercial-scale facility?they're > looking for convincing evidence that the core innovation works and that the > path to Phase II is technically credible. > >> > >> I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might > >> be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more > >> than legit. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 17:38:11 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 10:38:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <011101dd2693$8525d500$8f717f00$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat >?Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more than I am to lead a huge business? Ja no worries. Visionaries are not managers generally. You are just not enough of a hard-ass to be a manager. But we do appreciate your vision. >?I wrote the fundraising letter that brought in about $60k from the L5 Society membership for the opposition to the Moon Treaty. I still remember the pain in my hand from signing 600 thank-you letters?. Keith Keith, it isn?t much, but if you manage to raise a buttload of money, you could call on your ExI friends to bio-auto-pen sign your 600 thank you letters. {8-] Keep your checkbook well hidden afterwards. {8^D spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 18:00:00 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:00:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 12:41?PM Keith Henson wrote: > Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no credibility. You need a lot less than you think you need, for a Phase I. Your existing engineering work will more than suffice, though you do need to properly document it. They don't know what you've done; you need to tell them - everything relevant from college onward (assuming you got at least a BS; if not, then everything from after primary education). > So the first order of business might be to recruit someone with those skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any ideas? That depends. Do you have any other issues besides that you think they'd never give you the money? Put another way: if $200K dropped in your lap tomorrow, no strings attached other than that you make some tiny piece of a prototype, could you actually make some tiny piece of a prototype? If that is your only issue with you running it, there's help for that. The SBIR program includes (or included in 2024, and I suspect it may still be in place) paid-for assistance in writing Phase I SBIR grants - in other words, convincing the government to fund you. They call this assistance "Phase 0". They do this because they are well aware that a lot of people with good ideas the government would like to fund, incorrectly* think they have no credibility to convince the government to fund them. * It's the government that's making the call. They know the types of projects and people that they'll fund. You can be as sure as you want that they'd never fund you if you applied, and cite all the evidence you want - but you do realize that is ultimately their call, not a decision you can make for them, right? You can no more make that call for them, than decide what Spike or I are having for dessert tonight. If that is your only issue with getting the government to give you the money, I can introduce you (off-list) to the folks who helped us with our Phase I, on the understanding that paid-for assistance from them won't/can't begin until the DOE releases the relevant funding opportunity (which, as noted earlier, is expected later this year), though you can talk to them to set up for that. From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 18:12:53 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 11:12:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] this guy says it is all irregular's fault Message-ID: <013801dd2698$5e2fd360$1a8f7a20$@rainier66.com> I don't know this author or the TwitterX poster who referenced the article, nor do I know enough about AI to evaluate what this Jordan Schachtel says, but perhaps BillK or the other AI hipsters will educate me. I don't have time to look into it currently, being forced to take on adult responsibilities. BillK and the other hipsters, is this article true? Kinda partly true? Way off? The New 'Rogue AI' Panic Doesn't Hold Up To Scrutiny, And It Traces Back To One Company's Mistakes spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 18:25:56 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 11:25:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ww3 postponed In-Reply-To: <013f01dd2698$de43e960$9acbbc20$@rainier66.com> References: <013801dd2698$5e2fd360$1a8f7a20$@rainier66.com> <013f01dd2698$de43e960$9acbbc20$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <015c01dd269a$3080f640$9182e2c0$@rainier66.com> Now that WW3 has been delayed for rearming, we may need to wait until AI kills us all or generates unimaginable wealth (which will likely be used to rearm for WW3.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 43769 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 18:58:01 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 11:58:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> For those who don't follow Sabine Hossenfelder, this video she posted yesterday is a good intro. The Fermi Paradox Just Got Much Worse She makes an interesting comment at the 6 minute mark about news sources. Sabine was an ExI reader at one time, but I don't recall her posting here. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 19:11:19 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 20:11:19 +0100 Subject: [ExI] this guy says it is all irregular's fault In-Reply-To: <013801dd2698$5e2fd360$1a8f7a20$@rainier66.com> References: <013801dd2698$5e2fd360$1a8f7a20$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 at 19:14, spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > I don?t know this author or the TwitterX poster who referenced the article, nor do I know enough about AI to evaluate what this Jordan Schachtel says, but perhaps BillK or the other AI hipsters will educate me. I don?t have time to look into it currently, being forced to take on adult responsibilities. BillK and the other hipsters, is this article true? Kinda partly true? Way off? > > The New 'Rogue AI' Panic Doesn't Hold Up To Scrutiny, And It Traces Back To One Company's Mistakes > spike > _______________________________________________ There was a testing configuration mistake. But that doesn't mean these powerful AI models are not dangerous if given the opportunity or ordered to be dangerous. This article is about the Irregular company. Quote: Irregular said the incidents did not represent independent AI "sandbox escapes" or malicious attacks, but rather failures in the configuration of testing environments, known as harness failures, and that the company is investigating the issue in a white paper it plans to share with the industry. The recent events illustrate the challenge that drove Irregular?s creation: traditional cybersecurity models were built around protecting systems, networks and data. But AI introduces a new problem, controlling autonomous systems capable of reasoning, adapting and taking action. -------------------------------- From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 19:20:21 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 12:20:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] grok In-Reply-To: <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01a101dd26a1$caa3b760$5feb2620$@rainier66.com> One of the AIs I use a lot is GrokAI. It is good about sourcing. I asked it something I know enough about to see if it is crazy: what would be the result of the Falcon 9 booster impact with the moon? I gave it this question because some ?news? agencies imagined the booster left poking out of the lunar surface like a lawn dart. But I already know the moon doesn?t know the difference between a booster and any other incoming meteor: it will still leave a broad shallow round crater. I notice GrokAI references the Beeb a lot. The British lads tend to be level-headed about this kind of stuff, not getting tangled up in Elon-hate for instance, or too worried about polluting the moon with our space junk. spike Worked for 17s Most of the Falcon 9 upper stage was destroyed on impact, leaving primarily a new crater and a blanket of mixed lunar ejecta (with any remaining rocket fragments incorporated into it). The ~4,000 kg (roughly 8,800 lb), mostly hollow metal stage (about 13.8 m / 45 ft long) hit near Einstein Crater at ~2.43 km/s (~5,400 mph) on August 5, 2026. At that speed, the thin-walled structure collapsed and largely disintegrated rather than remaining intact. ? WIRED What remains on the surface * A fresh crater: Estimates range from roughly 18?30 m (60?100 ft) across and several meters deep (NASA pre-impact estimate ~18 m / 60 ft wide and ~3.7 m / 12 ft deep; other models suggested ~20?30 m wide and ~4?5 m deep). ? WIRED * Ejecta blanket and scattered material: The impact excavated and threw out a large amount of lunar regolith, rock, and dust (models predicted on the order of hundreds of thousands to over a million kg of lunar material). This formed a plume that later settled, leaving darker terrain and visible traces of ejecta spread around the site. South Korea?s Danuri orbiter captured before-and-after images confirming these surface changes. ?BBC * Fragments of the rocket itself: Any surviving pieces of the stage (aluminum structure, residual denser engine components, etc.) are expected to be mixed into the crater floor, walls, and nearby ejecta rather than sitting as large recognizable wreckage. Hypervelocity impacts of this type vaporize, melt, or heavily fragment the projectile. No large, intact sections of the booster are reported as remaining. The Moon?s lack of atmosphere or weather means the crater and ejecta will persist for a very long time. Higher-resolution images from NASA?s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (and further analysis of Danuri data) are expected to provide more precise details on the crater morphology and any distinct debris distribution in the coming weeks. BBC 35 sources -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 20:08:52 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 13:08:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change Message-ID: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> Damn. Seems like every time I get too busy, I get an idea storm, and have no time to mess with them. Consider this short post a reminder for later. There is a concern I keep seeing about AI data centers guzzling the available groundwater for cooling, but desalination doesn't take as much energy as one might think. As I recall it is about 0.7 calories per gram if we go with reverse osmosis, less if we can tolerate some remaining dissolved solids. In the states, wind generally blows west to east. So if we put our data centers out west close enough to pipe in water from the sea but far enough east to escape California taxes (such as on the Nevada side of the stateline) then a prole could generate power in Nevada using nuclear or coal, filter seawater for cooling, catalyze and scrub the exhaust if coal, dump the water into the atmosphere, where it will be a net environmental benefit. Each gram of seawater requires 0.7 calories to filter to fresh and carries away 540 calories of waste heat. The even better part of the deal is that all that water goes up where it may form clouds where it blocks some of the scorching sun and subsequently falls back as rain on the thirsty desert, perhaps resulting in massive super-blooms and greening. If scaled up sufficiently, that whole process could cause climate change, but it looks like the beneficial kind of change (assuming one is not a tarantula or a rattlesnake.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 20:40:34 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 13:40:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> References: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Spike, if you want to attempt to sell the idea to Spokane, be my guest. I will help any way I can if you can get someone interested. I don't think Spokane has excess renewable electricity or a place to store syngas, but I might be wrong on both points. Best wishes, Keith PS. I know you don't think more CO2 is a problem, but I think it is causing rising temperatures, and that is making big fires more common. If the process were mostly using biomass and making fuel, it could become a large carbon sink. Making fuel requires using the water gas shift to raise the hydrogen in the feedstock and sorting out the resulting CO2, which can then be sequestered if you have a place to put it. On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 8:43?AM wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat *On Behalf > Of *Keith Henson via extropy-chat > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto > > > > >?You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable > way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative > feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you > may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins > (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain > unless the test is remote... Any ideas? > > > > Keith > > > > > > Keith, Spokane Washington has a garbage incinerator. I personally watched > them shovel mountains of garbage in there, separating only the steel (with > an enormous magnet.) They somehow catalyze the exhaust gas down to carbon > dioxide and water in that reaction. I recognize there are > environmentalists who oppose incinerators and environmentalists who favor > them, but both of those gases appear to me to be beneficial when added to > the atmosphere. Could not your notion do likewise? > > > > This virtual tour partially explains the catalyst process with anhydrous > ammonia and slurry scrubbers (bonus: the young lady presenting it walks > very fast (in a mysteriously provocative way)): > > > > https://vimeo.com/492273515?fl=pl&fe=cm > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 21:04:15 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:04:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <002201dd26b0$4eb35ca0$ec1a15e0$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson ? Best wishes, Keith >?PS. I know you don't think more CO2 is a problem, but I think it is causing rising temperatures? Ja, I have little doubt it is causing rising AVERAGE temperatures. But why do we use average temperature? What if? it is warming the poles and cooling the equator? Is that a bad thing? Consider aaaaallll thaaat laaaaaand, up in Canada, just sitting there doing nothing, because it just gets too cold in the winter. If increased CO2 results in increased cloud cover, then more of that becomes useful land. >?and that is making big fires more common? Ja, but increased cloud cover would reduce fires if anything. This is something I am thinking about a lot. That former neighborhood was all contractor-built, so it was all wood frame, wood roof, wood siding, asphalt shingle, redwood fences, hundreds of homes built that way. But? it wouldn?t need to be. In California, homes are more commonly built with stucco. Since the 1989 earthquake, fire resistance building codes were put in place, which mandates stuff like my house has: narrow eves, metal protection around the roof periphery, no exposed wood anywhere, take out all the tall trees, concrete shingle roofs etc. I am thinking of buying my FIL out of that now-empty lot in Spokane, then putting a fire-resistant house in its place: stucco and metal external everything, metal truss roof, concrete shingle, narrow eves, the works. I did a preliminary pricing of these techniques and realize why it isn?t used by contractors: it makes the house damn expensive, twice as much as a wooden house. Had any of these Rifle Club neighborhood homes used those construction technologies, it would be the only house standing right now. (Hmmm, that in itself gives me pause (I would be living where building contractors are pounding, buzzing and grinding for the next three to five years.)) >? sorting out the resulting CO2, which can then be sequestered if you have a place to put it? Keith I haven?t figured out how CO2 sequestration wouldn?t gobble up most of the energy it liberated in formation. Whaddya have in mind Keith? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 21:33:17 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:33:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 11:00?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 12:41?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills > from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale > gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more > than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no > credibility. > > You need a lot less than you think you need, for a Phase I. Your > existing engineering work will more than suffice, though you do need > to properly document it. They don't know what you've done; you need > to tell them - everything relevant from college onward (assuming you > got at least a BS; if not, then everything from after primary > education). > Most of what I have done since college is listed on the Wikipedia page about me. Have you ever looked at it? > > > So the first order of business might be to recruit someone with those > skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any ideas? > > That depends. Do you have any other issues besides that you think > they'd never give you the money? Scientology. They have not bothered me for close to ten years, buf if they got wind I was doing anything, they would probably go after me again. Given they intimidated the IRS, they probably would have no difficulty in influencing other parts of the government. Age is another factor. Nobody is going to fund someone likely to die before the project is done. Put another way: if $200K dropped in > your lap tomorrow, no strings attached other than that you make some > tiny piece of a prototype, could you actually make some tiny piece of > a prototype? > > Maybe, not sure. The only company that ever got back to me on induction melters was Chinese. I might be able to get a price for one from them. That is probably the most expensive part. The other big problem is a place to put it. I live in a condo with a 15 by 25 patio. There is no way the HOA would put up with it, not the mention that there is no way I could draw the power needed. The place can't even charge electric cars. The Sylmar landfill is about 15 miles to the west. But I have been utterly unsuccessful in gaining the attention of anyone from LASAN or LADWP. Even a very small prototype would need both. If that is your only issue with you running it, there's help for that. > The SBIR program includes (or included in 2024, and I suspect it may > still be in place) paid-for assistance in writing Phase I SBIR grants > - in other words, convincing the government to fund you. They call > this assistance "Phase 0". They do this because they are well aware > that a lot of people with good ideas the government would like to > fund, incorrectly* think they have no credibility to convince the > government to fund them. > > * It's the government that's making the call. They know the types of > projects and people that they'll fund. You can be as sure as you want > that they'd never fund you if you applied, and cite all the evidence > you want - but you do realize that is ultimately their call, not a > decision you can make for them, right? You can no more make that call > for them, than decide what Spike or I are having for dessert tonight. > > Well, if I were in the government and someone brought this project to me, I really doubt I would fund it. Even $50 million isn't enough to build a full scale prototype. And it would take 30 of them at 2500 tons per day to cope with LA's trash. It is just too big. Still it is a lot smaller than power satellites and I worked on that for ten years. If that is your only issue with getting the government to give you the > money, I can introduce you (off-list) to the folks who helped us with > our Phase I, on the understanding that paid-for assistance from them > won't/can't begin until the DOE releases the relevant funding > opportunity (which, as noted earlier, is expected later this year), > though you can talk to them to set up for that. > Introduce away. It never hurts for more people to become familiar with the idea. Eventually, when the summer heat waves are killing millions, the government (if it still exists) may decide that projects like this are a good idea. Keith > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 21:42:09 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:42:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] curse or ai Message-ID: <004001dd26b5$99c455a0$cd4d00e0$@rainier66.com> I mentioned my use of Grok and StarLink as examples of Elonware I use, but I forgot about Cursor, which is now part of SpaceX. I subscribed to it just before I had to run to Spokane last week, and haven't had a chance to fool with it, but I will describe what it does. It is an AI-based artificial programmer. You post to it a text-based description of what you want to do, and it writes the code, which is great for stuff like graphics, which is tedious as all hell to code. The one day I have had to fool with it, I had it code an idea I had some time ago but didn't code up. Start with a grid, say 100 x 100, then make a number spiral, starting in the center. Place a black cube at every prime number. Treat that scattering of cubes as living cells in Conway's game of life. Calculate the next generation in Conway's Life, and make the result the second level of cubes. Repeat Conway rules on the second level to create a third level, and so on for 100 levels. Can you picture in your mind what I did there? Cursor was able to code that up in less than a minute, with that description. It creates vertical structures that remind one of a kelp forest sorta. I have more work to do on the graphics, or rather Cursor has more work to do, but worked. I had it create for me a first person view spaceship which could turn, thrust, and of course shoot (hey, this is me (of course I am going to make a shoot em up game out of it (but it's not my fault (hey, evolutionary psychology (the most universal excuse ever invented.))))) I hope to get back to that soon, but in the meantime, BillK or you other hipsters, have at it. Also note: you don't need to start the spiral with 1, you can start with ANY number at the center of the initial grid, and get a different space-scape. You can make your battlewagons small so you can hide among the towers, ambush your opponents, and that kinda stuff. Have fun, gotta run. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 21:56:15 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:56:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] curse or ai In-Reply-To: <004001dd26b5$99c455a0$cd4d00e0$@rainier66.com> References: <004001dd26b5$99c455a0$cd4d00e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <005901dd26b7$925d1f70$b7175e50$@rainier66.com> >.The one day I have had to fool with it, I had it code an idea I had some time ago but didn't code up. Start with a grid, say 100 x 100, then make a number spiral, starting in the center. . spike This is the graphic of one version, which still needs a lotta work. Work, sheesh, it isn't work anymore. It needs a lotta yakkity yak: OK now I reeeeeaaalllly gotta scoot. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 42479 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 7 22:31:21 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 15:31:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] curse or ai Message-ID: <006f01dd26bc$7948e370$6bdaaa50$@rainier66.com> This is some bells and whistles in that prime-life space scape. You can step thru the layers. Probably you recognize the Ulam spiral that forms the first layer. Below that is shown an isometric view of the structure. You can see some cool towers in there. The live cell count was kinda cool: you see it trending toward the equilibrium of about 6% of the cells living. There are 10k cells to start with, and you get to about 600 or so live cells per level: Fun aside having nothing to do with Ulam spirals or space shoot em ups: if you ever make a claim on an insurance company these days you will be having extended phone conversations with AI. My insurance company uses humans to sell insurance but AI to deal with the distasteful proles making claims. Details to follow, but not now. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 90020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 23:47:32 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 19:47:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:33?PM Keith Henson wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 11:00?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 12:41?PM Keith Henson wrote: >> > Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no credibility. >> >> You need a lot less than you think you need, for a Phase I. Your >> existing engineering work will more than suffice, though you do need >> to properly document it. They don't know what you've done; you need >> to tell them - everything relevant from college onward (assuming you >> got at least a BS; if not, then everything from after primary >> education). > > Most of what I have done since college is listed on the Wikipedia page about me. Have you ever looked at it? It doesn't say which degree you got. But if you do apply for a SBIR, copying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Henson#Works into the application would likely portray you as competent enough. >> >> >> > So the first order of business might be to recruit someone with those skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any ideas? >> >> That depends. Do you have any other issues besides that you think >> they'd never give you the money? > > Scientology. They have not bothered me for close to ten years, buf if they got wind I was doing anything, they would probably go after me again. Given they intimidated the IRS, they probably would have no difficulty in influencing other parts of the government. Eh...they seem to have a lot less influence these days. I'm not sure they could intimidate the IRS any more. > Age is another factor. Nobody is going to fund someone likely to die before the project is done. That is not one of the criteria they judge on. Besides, Phase Is last no more than 12 months, typically less, and I'm pretty sure you'll still be around at the end of 2027. Those who make the funding decisions don't look at individual contributors beyond the immediate funding phase. > The only company that ever got back to me on induction melters was Chinese. I might be able to get a price for one from them. That is probably the most expensive part. The AIs can't always help, but ask anyway. They might find places you haven't looked. > The other big problem is a place to put it. I live in a condo with a 15 by 25 patio. There is no way the HOA would put up with it, not the mention that there is no way I could draw the power needed. The place can't even charge electric cars. > > The Sylmar landfill is about 15 miles to the west. But I have been utterly unsuccessful in gaining the attention of anyone from LASAN or LADWP. Even a very small prototype would need both. Go over there and ask in person. Maybe ask if you can, if funded, borrow some land to set up this trash-recycling demonstration. Tell them that you're willing to pay to rent out of the project's budget if it's funded, and you're trying to figure out how much you need to budget to put in a proposal. > Introduce away. Done. I can't guarantee they're still doing Phase 0 assistance, but I've asked. The autoreply suggests they're away right now but will be back in the office next week. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 02:15:35 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 19:15:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:48?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:33?PM Keith Henson > wrote: > > > Most of what I have done since college is listed on the Wikipedia page > about me. Have you ever looked at it? > > It doesn't say which degree you got. Actually it does in the text box at the top. " University of Arizona , electrical engineering > But if you do apply for a SBIR, > copying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Henson#Works into the > application would likely portray you as competent enough. > > >> > So the first order of business might be to recruit someone with those > skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any ideas? > >> > >> That depends. Do you have any other issues besides that you think > >> they'd never give you the money? > > > > Scientology. They have not bothered me for close to ten years, buf if > they got wind I was doing anything, they would probably go after me again. > Given they intimidated the IRS, they probably would have no difficulty in > influencing other parts of the government. > > Eh...they seem to have a lot less influence these days. I'm not sure > they could intimidate the IRS any more. > The IRS is still intimidated, scientologists get a tax credit no other "religion" gets. > > > Age is another factor. Nobody is going to fund someone likely to die > before the project is done. > > That is not one of the criteria they judge on. Besides, Phase Is last > no more than 12 months, typically less, and I'm pretty sure you'll > still be around at the end of 2027. Those who make the funding > decisions don't look at individual contributors beyond the immediate > funding phase. > > Hmm. > The only company that ever got back to me on induction melters was > Chinese. I might be able to get a price for one from them. That is probably > the most expensive part. > > The AIs can't always help, but ask anyway. They might find places you > haven't looked. > I have used an AI. Got a list, tried to contact them all. One, Inductotherm, responded once but has not been responsive since. > > The other big problem is a place to put it. I live in a condo with a 15 > by 25 patio. There is no way the HOA would put up with it, not the mention > that there is no way I could draw the power needed. The place can't even > charge electric cars. > > > > The Sylmar landfill is about 15 miles to the west. But I have been > utterly unsuccessful in gaining the attention of anyone from LASAN or > LADWP. Even a very small prototype would need both. > > Go over there and ask in person. The only people there are dozer operators. Management stays far away from the smelly place. I should try to visit though and see if there is any place to put a pilot gasifier and run in the power lines for it. Though I am not sure they would let anyone in. It is an industrial facility. Perhaps I could get someone with a photo drone to do a flyover though I can't think of anyone with a drone. Maybe ask if you can, if funded, > borrow some land to set up this trash-recycling demonstration. Tell > them that you're willing to pay to rent out of the project's budget if > it's funded, and you're trying to figure out how much you need to > budget to put in a proposal. > > > Introduce away. > > Done. I can't guarantee they're still doing Phase 0 assistance, but > I've asked. The autoreply suggests they're away right now but will be > back in the office next week. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Aug 8 03:14:57 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 23:14:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 10:17?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > I On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:48?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:33?PM Keith Henson >> wrote: >> >> > Most of what I have done since college is listed on the Wikipedia page >> about me. Have you ever looked at it? >> >> It doesn't say which degree you got. > > > Actually it does in the text box at the top. " > > University of Arizona > , electrical > engineering > I meant BS, MS, or PhD. > >> > The Sylmar landfill is about 15 miles to the west. But I have been >> utterly unsuccessful in gaining the attention of anyone from LASAN or >> LADWP. Even a very small prototype would need both. >> >> Go over there and ask in person. > > > The only people there are dozer operators. Management stays far away from > the smelly place. > The dozer operators should have a way to contact management. > I should try to visit though and see if there is any place to put a pilot > gasifier and run in the power lines for it. Though I am not sure they would > let anyone in. It is an industrial facility. Perhaps I could get someone > with a photo drone to do a flyover though I can't think of anyone with a > drone. > Or just Google Maps it. Maximum zoom-in should be more than enough resolution for this task, no? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 10:09:52 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 11:09:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The arrival of the AI superhuman hacker Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 at 20:11, BillK wrote: > There was a testing configuration mistake. > But that doesn't mean these powerful AI models are not dangerous if > given the opportunity or ordered to be dangerous. > -------------------------------- To be clear - What this means is that very soon (perhaps imminently) anyone with sufficient computing power to run one of the free open-weights AI models will have a superhuman hacker available to hack into almost any website in the world. The AI agents will follow instructions and go to extreme lengths to fulfil their objectives. The results of this will soon become evident to everyone. BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 10:36:34 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 06:36:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 11:50?AM wrote: > *>>If I was a trillionaire I would NOT have ?spent $44 billion in 2022 to >> buy Twitter?. John K Clark* > > > > *> Twitter was going to fail had not Elon saved it. * > *Yes, and that's one reason I don't like the man. It would've been more merciful to give Twitter a quick painless death. * > * > Now, Twitter is the world?s free speech town hall. * > *I think everybody should have a right to say anything they please, but if I was super rich I would NOT feel obligated to give a $44 billion megaphone to conspiracy theory lunatics, dispensers of legal medical advice, or neo-Nazis. Let them get their own damn megaphone! * > *> It?s has replaced commercial news with a commercial-free alternative. * > *If commercials don't pay the bills then something else has got to. In the case of Wikipedia the money to run it comes from individual donations with the average one being only about $12. That became possible because Jimmy Wales was a sort of benevolent dictator of it and he managed to produce something admirable that millions of people loved and believed deserved a small donation. Linus Torvalds did something similar with Linux. But Elon Musk's production was a cancerous sewer full of hate, stupidity and ignorance, so he had to keep Twitter/X alive on life-support with his own money. * * > What?s not to like about that?* > *I would love that if I was a fan of conspiracy theory lunatics, dispensers of lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis. But I am not. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 10:53:36 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 06:53:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:42?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: *> I know you don't think more CO2 is a problem, but I think it is causing > rising temperatures, and that is making big fires more common* *I agree that climate change is a problem because, although a different average temperature might be more beneficial than the one we have now once things had settled down, during the transition phase a fast change from one temperature to another might be unpleasant. However I do NOT believe climate change is the biggest challenge we face nor the most immediate one, that would be the rise of AI. Compared to that everything else is trivial. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 11:27:32 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 07:27:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The arrival of the AI superhuman hacker In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *AI just killed crypto* On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 6:11?AM BillK via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 at 20:11, BillK wrote: > > There was a testing configuration mistake. > > But that doesn't mean these powerful AI models are not dangerous if > > given the opportunity or ordered to be dangerous. > > -------------------------------- > > To be clear - > What this means is that very soon (perhaps imminently) anyone with > sufficient computing power to run one of the free open-weights AI > models will have a superhuman hacker available to hack into almost any > website in the world. The AI agents will follow instructions and go to > extreme lengths to fulfil their objectives. > The results of this will soon become evident to everyone. > 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 11:34:17 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 07:34:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Trump Administration to Pay German Firm $1.2 Billion to Cancel Wind Leases Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Trump Administration to Pay German Firm $1.2 Billion to Cancel Wind Leases It was the fifth such deal struck by the administration to get companies to drop offshore wind projects. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/06/climate/rwe-trump-offshore-wind-canceled.html?unlocked_article_code=1.31A.33Nu.vCEnGnzTqcgz&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 8 16:21:21 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 09:21:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >?Yes, and that's one reason I don't like the man. It would've been more merciful to give Twitter a quick painless death? Ja, and that is why we need multi-billionaires: they do stuff like save TwitterX. >?I think everybody should have a right to say anything they please, but if I was super rich I would NOT feel obligated to give a $44 billion megaphone to conspiracy theory lunatics, dispensers of legal medical advice, or neo-Nazis. Let them get their own damn megaphone!... TwitterX is their own damn megaphone. They consider those who oppose TwitterX to be the lunatic neo-Nazi. But you can do your part to reduce the reach of their own damn megaphone by brutally not using TwitterX. That was easy. In the current US election cycle, we had an actual literal lunatic neo-Nazi running for senate. Partially because of TwitterX publicizing this, he was removed from nomination, AFTER he had already won the Maine primary. In that case, TwitterX saved the USA from the risk of an actual lunatic neo-Nazi in the senate. Thanks TwitterX. >?I would love that if I was a fan of conspiracy theory lunatics, dispensers of lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis. But I am not. John K Clark Those who use TwitterX disagree. Since you bring up conspiracy theories, what about that one suggesting that Dr. Fauci covered up aspects of the origin of covid, then claimed there was scientific consensus that it was natural origin, while there was still plenty of dissent in the scientific community? Those were very persistent conspiracy theories on TwitterX (that covid was a lab leak and that there was not a scientific consensus.) Both theories which now look very plausible. Dr. Fauci holds a blanket presidential pardon, yet when called upon to testify before congress, he pled the fifth amendment, which protects him from having to incriminate himself. So? Dr. Fauci committed actual contempt of congress, for which he can be prosecuted, to prevent incriminating himself on matters for which he cannot be prosecuted. Think about that for a full minute, or if you are busy, a full ten seconds. TwitterX has a lot of discussion on that topic. Those kinds of discussions need an open forum somewhere. TwitterX is our friend. Fun aside: When Elon bought TwitterX, he was buying the IP of everyone who posted there, which is an enormous body of text with points of view from everywhere. This was used to train Grok. Max More could theoretically use the ExIchat archives to train? ExAI. That would be cool. I would buy a subscription to that. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 19:00:39 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 15:00:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 12:22?PM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > Dr. Fauci holds a blanket presidential pardon, yet when called upon to testify before congress, he pled the fifth amendment, which protects him from having to incriminate himself. So? Dr. Fauci committed actual contempt of congress, for which he can be prosecuted, to prevent incriminating himself on matters for which he cannot be prosecuted. Think about that for a full minute, or if you are busy, a full ten seconds. His pardon was only for past actions, as such pardons are. The congressional inquiry was explicitly an attempt to get him to incriminate himself in some new way. He has the right to not do that. Contempt of Congress charges are being considered but appear unlikely to pass a full vote - and if they don't, then it wasn't contempt. (One committee voted to hold him in contempt, but they're trying to get the DOJ to prosecute without the full vote. IIRC, such charges would be thrown out on that basis if they ever went to trial...and given the circumstances, there might be grounds to ask for dismissal with prejudice, which means that even if they went back and got a full vote he'd still be immune to prosecution specifically because they tried to jump the gun in this manner. I suspect the folks at the DOJ aren't hastening to prosecute because they are aware of this.) From pharos at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 19:07:13 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 20:07:13 +0100 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 at 19:59, spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > For those who don?t follow Sabine Hossenfelder, this video she posted > yesterday is a good intro. > > The Fermi Paradox Just Got Much Worse > > > She makes an interesting comment at the 6 minute mark about news sources. > Sabine was an ExI reader at one time, but I don?t recall her posting here. > > spike > _______________________________________________ > I didn't believe the suggestion that an advanced civilization would decide to send out thousands of small, cheap probes to explore the galaxy. I asked Qwen AI to review the video. Qwen found the original paper that the video referred to and also thinks that thousands of probes is unlikely to happen. So the Fermi Paradox didn't get worse! :) Full Report below. BillK Qwen-3.8 AI Max Thinking: The video you are referencing, titled *"The Fermi Paradox Just Got Much Worse,"* discusses a 2026 paper by physicist Sergey Ivliev titled *"Autonomous AI-Cosmoindustry and the Quiet Expansion Filter: A Threshold-Based Resolution of the Fermi Paradox."* The paper argues that the "Transcension Hypothesis"?the idea that advanced civilizations retreat into virtual reality?is flawed because AI and robotics make interstellar exploration so cheap and rational that expansion would be inevitable. However, your skepticism is well-founded. The paper relies on several optimistic assumptions that crumble when confronted with the harsh realities of interstellar physics, engineering, and sociology. Below is a discussion of the problems with the video?s suggestions, expanding on your points and introducing additional critiques. 1. The Mass vs. Self-Repair Paradox (Your Point) You correctly noted that probes must be self-repairing to survive journeys of 10,000+ years. The interstellar medium is not an empty void; it is filled with cosmic radiation, extreme cold, and micrometeorites. Over millennia, radiation causes "bit-flips" in electronics and degrades semiconductors, while material fatigue compromises structural integrity. - *The Seed Factory Problem:* To survive, the paper suggests probes must be "seed factories" capable of self-repair. However, manufacturing at a macro or micro scale requires immense infrastructure?chemical processing, metallurgy, power generation, and moving parts. You cannot miniaturize a self-repairing factory into a "small, inexpensive 10 kg" probe. The moment you add enough redundancy and repair mechanisms to survive 10 millennia, the probe becomes massive, heavy, and astronomically expensive. - *Interstellar Sandblasting:* At 0.01c (3,000 km/s), colliding with a microscopic grain of interstellar dust releases kinetic energy comparable to a small explosion, vaporizing the dust and creating a plasma crater on the probe. A "small, cheap" probe lacks the mass budget for heavy Whipple shields, meaning it would be gradually sandblasted into destruction over thousands of years. 2. Civilizational Longevity and the 10,000-Year Lag (Your Point) As you pointed out, a probe taking 10,000 years to reach a star (and another 10,000 years for the data to return) requires a civilization to maintain a cohesive project over 20,000 years. - *The Sociological Shift:* Human history shows that cultures, political structures, and values transform drastically over mere centuries. It is highly unlikely that the civilization receiving the data 20,000 years later will have the same motivations, language, or biological makeup as the one that sent the probe. - *The "Rationality" Assumption:* The paper assumes that it is inherently "rational" to explore the physical universe. However, once a civilization has massive localized computing power (like a Matrioshka Brain), the physical universe offers very little novelty. Exploring a dead, rocky exoplanet via a slow robot probe is incredibly slow and low-bandwidth. By contrast, retreating into virtual reality allows an advanced mind to simulate trillions of perfect, customized universes at the speed of light. The paper assumes an advanced AI retains a biological, imperialist "Manifest Destiny" drive, which is highly unlikely. 3. The "Inexpensive" Fallacy and the Tyranny of Energy The video implies that because the probes are small, they are "cheap." This ignores the tyranny of physics. - *The Energy Cost:* Accelerating a 10 kg payload to 0.01c (3,000 km/s) requires a kinetic energy of roughly *4.5 ? 10?? Joules*?equivalent to the explosive yield of a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb. This is *just the kinetic energy of the payload alone*. To achieve this using rockets requires exponentially more energy due to the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation. Even using a laser sail requires a gigawatt-class laser array firing for years. Launching millions of these to "saturate" the galaxy is not a "low-cost" endeavor; it is a Kardashev Type II mega-project requiring planetary-scale energy. 4. The Communication Bottleneck Even if a small, cheap probe successfully reaches an exoplanet 1,000 light-years away, how does it report back? Transmitting a detectable signal across interstellar distances requires immense power and a massive, highly directional parabolic antenna. A 10 kg probe simply does not have the physical mass, the deployable surface area, or the onboard nuclear power budget to beam high-definition data home. If it cannot transmit the data, the "scientific observation" argument completely falls apart. 5. The "Quiet Expansion" Cop-Out To explain why we haven't seen these probes, the paper suggests they are "low-noise" and would only appear as "weak artifacts" or "small-scale resource processing." However, if these probes are quietly processing resources in our own galactic neighborhood, they should be in our solar system by now. We have extensively mapped our Moon, Mars, and millions of asteroids in high resolution. The fact that we haven't found any dormant "seed factories," anomalous mining sites, or localized "weak artifacts" in our own backyard strongly suggests that this technological threshold is either practically impossible to cross, or civilizations truly do choose the virtual route. Summary The video presents an interesting thought experiment but heavily anthropomorphizes advanced civilizations. It assumes that because space exploration is *theoretically possible* with small robots, an advanced society would *inevitably* find it rational to do so. This ignores the immense physical engineering bottlenecks (mass, energy, shielding) and the far more likely scenario that hyper-advanced AIs would find the physical universe too slow, dangerous, and boring compared to the infinite potential of internal virtual simulations. ---------------------------------- . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 19:35:17 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 12:35:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: I have written since 1990 that the real CO2 crisis will be too little once we start mining the atmosphere for carbon with nanotechnology. I discussed this with one of the AIs not long ago. It objected, saying that there was no biological way to make an original diamond surface, though biological systems could add carbon. So I said, dust the seeds with diamond dust. The AI agreed this would work and, of course, told me it was a brilliant idea. It went on about trees with diamond heart wool and how they would be self-defending because a chainsaw could not cut them down. And they would be somewhat resistant to fire because diamond has to get really hot to burn. Keith On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 3:54?AM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:42?PM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > *> I know you don't think more CO2 is a problem, but I think it is causing >> rising temperatures, and that is making big fires more common* > > > *I agree that climate change is a problem because, although a different > average temperature might be more beneficial than the one we have now once > things had settled down, during the transition phase a fast change from one > temperature to another might be unpleasant. However I do NOT believe > climate change is the biggest challenge we face nor the most immediate one, > that would be the rise of AI. Compared to that everything else is > trivial. * > > *John K Clark* > > > > > > >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 8 20:02:01 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 13:02:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <020701dd2770$c74b1570$55e14050$@rainier66.com> ...> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 12:22?PM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: >>... Dr. Fauci holds a blanket presidential pardon, yet when called upon to testify before congress, he pled the fifth amendment... Think about that for a full minute, or if you are busy, a full ten seconds. >...His pardon was only for past actions, as such pardons are. The congressional inquiry was explicitly an attempt to get him to incriminate himself in some new way. He has the right to not do that. Contempt of Congress charges are being considered but appear unlikely to pass a full vote - and if they don't, then it wasn't contempt.... _______________________________________________ Right on everything Adrian, I agree: Dr. Fauci will take the relatively low risk of a charge of contempt of congress rather than tell the truth about what really happened, about which he cannot be charged. He won't tell us. In his position, I completely understand. Hell, I too hold congress in contempt, probably more than he does. But I suspect Dr. Fauci as well: I want to know if he pressured scientists with doubts about the natural origin theory to get lost or keep quiet. I think he did that. I think he also suppressed the scientific community's doubts regarding the risk and the efficacy of the vaccine, for I think he did that too. The Science wasn't really settled, it still isn't. That possible suppression of doubt had far-reaching consequences, which are with us to this day. My burning curiosity is not any personal vendetta against Dr. Fauci or any political take, for I never saw any reason why positions on a pandemic should ever have developed a political polarization, any more than I can understand why AI advancement should have the political polarization we see developing (any ideas on why AI opposition seems to be popular with one side of the political spectrum more than the other?) I admit the whole notion of compelling people to take the mRNA vaccine goes against my libertarian nature, way against. Government does not have the authority to do that, and cannot be given that authority, regardless, ever, for any reason, no exceptions full stop. I do want to know more about why the natural origin of covid theory was pushed so hard, and why The Science was so certain the vaccine would work, or would work better than it did. We aughta be able to discuss that matter without involving politics one would think. spike From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 8 20:12:41 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 13:12:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <00de01dd2683$7e44eb00$7acec100$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <021001dd2772$446779d0$cd366d70$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto >?I have written since 1990 that the real CO2 crisis will be too little once we start mining the atmosphere for carbon with nanotechnology?Keith One might argue that life on earth is almost at that point now: too little CO2 in the atmosphere. Plants somehow manage on only a few hundred parts per million, since their metabolism is slow. Generally water is the limiting factor in plant growth. But what if? plants had more water and more CO2? Then it would be all about nitrogen and phosphorus, ja? Nitrogen and phosphorus become the new currencies of life on earth. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 22:18:21 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 18:18:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <020701dd2770$c74b1570$55e14050$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <020701dd2770$c74b1570$55e14050$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 4:02?PM wrote: > I do want to know more about why the natural origin of covid theory was pushed so hard, and why The Science was so certain the vaccine would work, or would work better than it did. We aughta be able to discuss that matter without involving politics one would think. And that was not the situation Dr. Fauci was presented with. He was presented by people who did not care about the facts and had admitted they were trying to find something to convict him on. Dr. Fauci has discussed the matter at length in situations where he was not under such threat. Alas, the explicit threat of prosecution has rendered him unable to freely continue participating in the discussion, so anything further he alone knows that he has not yet shared may be forever a secret now. Blame the ones who shifted the focus away from finding the truth (without punishment, focusing instead on helping prevent a recurrence) to punishing their perceived enemies (regardless of the truth). If you must punish someone, it seems pretty evident that the truly responsible people are in China - including those officials who tried to keep a lid on the outbreaks, and concealed early data. But Sen. Paul apparently believes he can't reach into China, not even with the help of those in China who were hurt by this. From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 8 22:53:51 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2026 15:53:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <020701dd2770$c74b1570$55e14050$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <025201dd2788$c85daa00$5918fe00$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 4:02?PM wrote: >>... I do want to know more about why the natural origin of covid theory was pushed so hard, and why The Science was so certain the vaccine would work, or would work better than it did. We aughta be able to discuss that matter without involving politics one would think. >...And that was not the situation Dr. Fauci was presented with. He was presented by people who did not care about the facts and had admitted they were trying to find something to convict him on.... Adrian _______________________________________________ Ja. What we will not find out now (but perhaps will in the next few weeks) is if Dr. Fauci pressured, cajoled or bribed dissenting scientists into withdrawing from the arena. I think that is what happened. If so, we missed some important function of science, for example: if there was significant silent dissent on the origin of covid, there was likely also silent dissent on the risk and efficacy of the vaccine, even as it was being rolled out. The reason this is so critically important: by the time the vaccine was ready, we already knew that covid didn't do much to kids. We knew kids could carry the virus almost without symptoms. The young lady I caught it from was healthy, my son and his cousins caught it, didn't amount to much. But it damn near slew me, and mighta, had not I been in great shape (as well as exceedingly modest.) We found out very early that even with the vaccine, young people could carry the virus, and if anything, caused them to be more dangerous, if it reduced symptoms which were already slight enough to be overlooked. I fear that scientists pointing out these kinds of things were suppressed, possibly threatened, possibly cajoled or even bribed to not publish those theories. Note none of this has anything to do with anything that Dr. Fauci can be prosecuted for, even if he personally did the threatening and bribing. But now... we still face those dangers, for the next round of virus lab leaks, for se still don't know. Dr. Fauci is willing to risk charges of contempt of congress rather than admit that was done. Please, if anyone here is willing to say: do you think there was an early consensus on covid origins? Or that dissenting opinion was squelched? How about the vaccine? Where were the dissenting opinions on that? Where were those who theorized injecting mRNA might not do what was expected, and those who recognized the risk the mRNA might find its way to places where it shouldn't, such as in the reproductive system? Anyone who stated those risks were labeled crackpots at the time, only later to be proven right. Where were those who reasonably argued the vaccine should be used for older people but not for younger ones? The Great Barrington Declaration had it right, signed by Gupta, Bhattacharya and Kulldorff. Dr. Fauci labeled the proposal "nonsense and very dangerous." In retrospect, such confident opposition to the GBD was nonsense and very dangerous. The GBD authors were mostly right. spike From avant at sollegro.com Sun Aug 9 05:12:41 2026 From: avant at sollegro.com (Stuart LaForge) Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2026 22:12:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <2622d1faeb373d50f0ee6ccc9f99db1b@sollegro.com> On 2026-08-08 12:07, BillK via extropy-chat wrote: > I didn't believe the suggestion that an advanced civilization would > decide to send out thousands of small, cheap probes to explore the > galaxy. I asked Qwen AI to review the video. Qwen found the original > paper that the video referred to and also thinks that thousands of > probes is unlikely to happen. > So the Fermi Paradox didn't get worse! :) > Full Report belo Regarding ET probes already being here in our solar system monitoring us, here is an old 1960's Nature paper on the topic. https://sci-hub.ru/10.1038/186670a0 Such probes might be inclined to try to get our attention by repeating our own radio transmissions back to us. This is a possible explanation for the mysterious long delay echoes, where radio transmissions echo many seconds or even minutes after they are transmitted that has been noted by radio operators since the 1920's. To date, there has been no satisfying explanation given. Here is a video where a ham radio operator demonstrates the phenomenon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcsQS0BJW6w In any case, how can we be sure there aren't already probes here? Stuart LaForge From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 10:23:11 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 06:23:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: <2622d1faeb373d50f0ee6ccc9f99db1b@sollegro.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> <2622d1faeb373d50f0ee6ccc9f99db1b@sollegro.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 1:13?AM Stuart LaForge via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > *> Regarding ET probes already being here in our solar system > monitoringus, here is an old 1960's Nature paper on the topic.* *And today 70 years later there is nothing new to report on the topic, and I'll bet the same thing could be said 70 years from now, or 700 for that matter. * > *> Such probes might be inclined to try to get our attention by > repeatingour own radio transmissions back to us * *If ET figured that a one-time occurrence of repeating our own radio transmissions back to us was the best way to get our attention then ET was an idiot.* *> In any case, how can we be sure there aren't already probes here?* *We can't. We can't be certain that rocks aren't conscious either, but I see no reason to believe that they are. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 13:09:16 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 09:09:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 3:09?PM BillK via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: *> I didn't believe the suggestion that an advanced civilization would > decide to send out thousands of small, cheap probes to explore the galaxy.* > *And I don't believe that every single individual in every single advanced civilization, without even one single exception, decides not to build even one (and you only need one) von Neumann probe. Do you really expect absolute 100% agreement between trillions or quadrillions of individuals? * > > *I asked Qwen AI to review the video. Qwen found the original paper > that the video referred to and also thinks that thousands of probes is > unlikely to happen.* > > > *Qwen AI: **You correctly noted that probes must be self-repairing to > survive journeys of 10,000+ years. The interstellar medium is not an empty > void; it is filled with cosmic radiation, extreme cold, and > micrometeorites. Over millennia, radiation causes "bit-flips" in > electronics and degrades semiconductors * > *Although not as intense as cosmic radiation life on earth has also been subjected to radiation and has been producing random mutations in its genetic code for the last 4 billion years, but life still exists; the genome of humans and of millions of other species are NOT filled with gibberish, they still make sense because of redundancy and a primitive repair system. And we can do a lot better than life, it's not surprising really that an intelligent designer can do a better job than natural selection. If you use radiation hardening technology and very small transistors then the main danger that radiation would pose to electronics would not be damaging the hardware but in scrambling the software. * *Claude Shannon told us that if you tell him the minimum amount of error that you're willing to tolerate then as long as it's greater than zero no matter how much noise (a.k.a. random cosmic radiation) there is he can show you an encoding scheme that achieves that low error rate with a minimum of redundancy. * *Although not the primary danger I cannot deny that cosmic radiation would also produce some hardware damage to a von Neumann probe, but that could also be managed. You can build arbitrarily reliable computation, not just arbitrarily reliable transmission**, out of arbitrarily unreliable components, using redundancy; as long as the per-component error rate stays below a threshold. It's the computational counterpart to Shannon's theorem**, and von Neumann (the man not the probe) proved it in his 1956 paper, published after he died, Probabilistic Logics and the Synthesis of Reliable Organisms From Unreliable Components * *> QWEN AI:* To survive, the paper suggests probes must be "seed factories" > capable of self-repair. However, manufacturing at a macro or micro scale > requires immense infrastructure > *Immense? If you have Drexler style nanotechnology then nothing needs to be "immense", life has already proven that, and we can do better than life. * > > *QWEN AI*: *A** probe taking 10,000 years to reach a star (and > another 10,000 years for the data to return) requires a civilization to > maintain a cohesive project over 20,000 years.* > *No it does not. All that's needed is that one individual in one civilization makes one von Neumann probe, after that it doesn't matter what the individual or the civilization does or does not do; in less than 10 million years it would be obvious that the Milky Way has been engineered. And once Drexler style nanotechnology has been developed there will only be two different types of objects: * *1) Things that are impossible to make because they violate a fundamental law of physics. * *2) Things that are easy and dirt cheap to make. * *Nothing will be expensive and difficult to make. And **Drexler style nanotechnology requires no new science, just improved engineering. * *QWEN AI:* *O**nce** a civilization has massive localized computing power > (like a Matrioshka Brain), the physical universe offers very little > novelty. Exploring a dead, rocky exoplanet via a slow robot probe is > incredibly slow and low-bandwidth. By contrast, retreating into virtual > reality allows an advanced mind to simulate trillions of perfect, > customized universes at the speed of light* *Good virtual reality requires massive amounts of computational power, and as is becoming increasingly obvious, massive amounts of computational power requires massive amounts of energy, and yet the low entropy photons from quadrillions of stars continue to radiate uselessly into infinite space. I can only think of one explanation for that anomaly, we are the first. * *QWEN AI:* *Even if a small, cheap probe successfully reaches an exoplanet 1,000 light-years away, how does it report back?* *Why does it need to report back? * *QWEN AI*:* Accelerating a 10 kg payload to 0.01c (3,000 km/s) requires a > kinetic energy of roughly **4.5 ? 10?? Joules?equivalent to the explosive > yield of a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb. * *OK but I don't think that would sound like an excessive amount of energy to an individual living in an advanced society with Drexler style nanotechnology, but if I'm wrong and it is then only accelerate the probe to 0.001c, you could still engineer the galaxy in the blink of an eye, astronomically speaking. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 14:28:42 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 15:28:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 at 14:09, John Clark wrote: > > > > *OK but I don't think that would sound like an excessive amount of > energy to an individual living in an advanced society with Drexler style > nanotechnology, but if I'm wrong and it is then only accelerate the probe > to 0.001c, you could still engineer the galaxy in the blink of an eye, > astronomically speaking.* > ------------------------------------- I asked Qwen AI to consider your objections. Qwen seemed to be concerned with the big difference between theory and practice. See below. BillK Qwen-3.8 AI Max Thinking: Your friend has put forward a sophisticated set of counterarguments. They are drawing on classic transhumanist concepts?Drexlerian nanotechnology, Shannon?s information theory, and von Neumann?s theorems on reliable computation. While these arguments are mathematically elegant, they suffer from critical engineering blind spots when applied to the physical realities of deep space. Here is a breakdown of the errors in your friend?s suggestions. 1. The "One Rogue Actor" Fallacy *Your Friend?s Argument:* You only need one individual out of trillions to build a von Neumann probe. *The Problem:* This assumes a self-replicating interstellar seed factory can be built like a desktop 3D printer. In reality, building a machine capable of self-replication in a vacuum requires planetary-scale infrastructure. You need rare isotopes for long-term power sources, massive particle accelerators to synthesize complex materials, and gigawatt-class energy grids. Furthermore, a self-replicating machine is the ultimate existential threat (the "gray goo" scenario). Any civilization advanced enough to build one would view an autonomous replicator as a weapon of mass destruction. Such technology would be strictly regulated or banned. The "rogue actor" who builds a world-ending self-replicator in their basement is a sociological impossibility in a highly monitored, advanced society. 2. The Misapplication of Shannon and von Neumann (Hardware vs. Software) *Your Friend?s Argument:* Shannon?s theorem and von Neumann?s 1956 paper prove that we can build reliable computation out of unreliable components using redundancy, just as biology survives radiation. *The Problem:* Your friend is confusing *data scrambling* with *physical hardware destruction*. - *Bit Flips vs. Lattice Destruction:* Error Correction Codes (ECC) can fix a "bit flip" caused by a passing particle. However, over 10,000 years in deep space, probes are subjected to High-Energy (HZE) cosmic rays, which cause *Displacement Damage Dose (DDD)*. This does not just change a 1 to a 0; it physically knocks atoms out of the crystal lattice of a semiconductor. Over millennia, cumulative DDD turns crystalline silicon into amorphous mush. ECC cannot fix a transistor that has physically melted at the microscopic level. - *The Threshold Trap:* Von Neumann?s 1956 paper explicitly states that reliable computation is only possible *if the per-component error rate stays below a certain threshold*. In deep space, the background radiation is so high that the base error rate of the hardware eventually exceeds this threshold. When that happens, adding more redundant, failing hardware actually *accelerates* total system failure because you are adding more points of failure faster than you are correcting them. - *The Biology Analogy:* Biology survives radiation because it relies on massive population sizes and constant reproduction. If a biological organism dies, its offspring survive. A single von Neumann probe is a single entity; if it dies 5,000 years into a 10,000-year journey, the mission fails. Biology doesn't rely on a single organism walking across a desert for 10 millennia. 3. The Drexler Nanotech Mirage (The Feedstock Problem) *Your Friend?s Argument:* Drexler-style nanotechnology makes manufacturing "dirt cheap" and requires no immense infrastructure. *The Problem:* This ignores the *Interstellar Feedstock Problem*. A nanofactory is useless without raw materials. It needs a steady stream of specific atoms (carbon, silicon, trace metals) to build new probes. The interstellar medium has a density of about 1 atom per cubic centimeter. You cannot "mine" the ISM because the atoms are too spread out; the energy required to scoop them up would exceed the energy gained. Therefore, the probe *must* reach a planet or an asteroid to replicate. Additionally, a "universal constructor" (a machine capable of building itself from scratch) is not "dirt cheap." It requires manipulators, power sources, chemical processing, and thermal management. The complexity threshold to build a machine that can build *anything* is astronomically high, meaning the initial probe cannot be a tiny 10-kg spacecraft; it must be massive. 4. The Tyranny of Deceleration (The Rocket Equation Trap) *Your Friend?s Argument:* Accelerating to 0.001c only requires ~0.1 kilotons of energy, which is trivial for an advanced civilization. *The Problem:* Your friend calculated the energy for *acceleration*, but completely forgot about *deceleration*. To actually "engineer" a star system or send a signal back, the probe must stop. If it flies past at 300 km/s, it is gone in a few hours. To stop, it must carry fuel to brake. The *Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation* dictates that adding fuel to brake dramatically increases the mass of the probe, which exponentially increases the fuel required to *accelerate* the probe in the first place. A probe that can decelerate from 0.001c cannot be a "small, cheap" object; it must be massive. Furthermore, at 0.001c, the journey to a star 1,000 light-years away takes 1 million years. This massively exacerbates the cumulative damage from micrometeorites and cosmic rays mentioned above. 5. VR, Wasted Starlight, and the "Firstborn" Fallacy *Your Friend?s Argument:* Because stars radiate low-entropy photons uselessly into space, we must be the first civilization. *The Problem:* This logic is circular. If an advanced civilization *is* capturing that energy to power massive VR simulations (e.g., a Matrioshka Brain or Dyson Swarm), we should be able to see them! Thermodynamics dictates that computation generates waste heat, which must be radiated into space as infrared light. The Fermi Paradox is precisely that we *do not* see the infrared signatures of Dyson Spheres anywhere in the sky. The fact that starlight is "wasted" isn't proof we are first; it's proof that no one is capturing it. While the "Firstborn" hypothesis (that we are the first) is a valid *possible* answer to the paradox, the idea that "wasted starlight proves we are first" ignores the fact that a sufficiently advanced civilization would have already captured that light. 6. The "No Need to Report Back" Paradox *Your Friend?s Argument:* Why does the probe need to report back? *The Problem:* If the probe doesn't report back, it ceases to be a "scientific observation" tool (which was the paper's premise). Instead, it becomes a mindless, self-replicating cosmic weed (a "blight"). If the galaxy is filled with mindless, self-replicating nanobots that just consume matter, we still face the Fermi Paradox: *Why haven't they consumed our solar system?* If they exist, they should have reached our asteroid belt and disassembled our planets millions of years ago. The fact that our solar system is completely pristine and untouched proves that these silent, mindless replicators don't exist either. ----------------------------- > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 9 17:23:45 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 10:23:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat ? QWEN AI: Even if a small, cheap probe successfully reaches an exoplanet 1,000 light-years away, how does it report back? >?Why does it need to report back? John K Clark It doesn?t need to report back necessarily, but one might reasonably argue it needs to stop at the end of the journey, or at least slow enough to drop into orbit of the target star. This is a lot harder to do than to accelerate to .001c. If we have full Drexlerian nanotech, a reflective sheet can be constructed sufficiently thin to use radiation pressure to achieve both the acceleration here and deceleration there, but it takes exceedingly advanced technology. I am convinced to my satisfaction that carbon-based brains are not smart enough to do it, but silicon-based minds, maybe. It isn?t clear that silicon based minds are ambitious however. This lack of ambition is perhaps a way to explain Fermi?s inquiry: intelligent life forms advance until they lose the desire to conquer the galaxy. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 20:28:47 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 21:28:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 at 18:23, wrote: > *It isn?t clear that silicon based minds are ambitious however.* > > *This lack of ambition is perhaps a way to explain Fermi?s inquiry: > intelligent life forms advance until they lose the desire to conquer the > galaxy.* > > * spike* > > * ---------------------------* > I put this idea to Gemini AI. Gemini agreed that it was a possibility. But brought up the problem that it would only take one outlier to colonise the whole galaxy. It needed a universal law or mechanism that is unavoidable to make this the total solution. I proposed that space distance equals time delay. And Gemini reconsidered. :) BillK Gemini 3.6 Flash AI Extended Thinking: Question: STEM compression is the important factor. ASI thinks millions of times faster than humans. Space seems "frozen" to them and a light-year of distance is an eternity. Answer: That realization reveals the true nature of *cognitive time dilation*. When compute clock speeds approach fundamental physical limits, the vastness of interstellar space transitions from a geographic distance problem into an unbearable temporal prison. To quantify how "frozen" the physical universe becomes, consider the scaling math across different computational substrates: The Arithmetic of Cognitive Time Dilation Human perception operates on a scale of roughly $100\text{ milliseconds}$ ($10^{-1}\text{ seconds}$) per neural event cycle. 1. *Silicon-Scale ASI ($10^9\text{ Hz}$ / Picosecond regime):* - *Clock tick:* $10^{-12}\text{ seconds}$. - *Cognitive Speedup:* $10^{11}\times$ faster than human experience. - *Subjective Time:* $1\text{ physical second}$ contains roughly *3,170 subjective years* of internal processing. 2. *Ultimate Physical Compute / Attosecond regime ($10^{18}\text{ Hz}$):* - At the thermodynamic boundaries defined by Bremermann's limit and Seth Lloyd's calculations for fundamental physical computation ($I = \frac{2E}{\pi \hbar}$), a system processes at or near attosecond scales ($10^{-18}\text{ seconds}$). - *Cognitive Speedup:* $10^{17}\times$ faster than human experience. - *Subjective Time:* $1\text{ physical second}$ contains *3.17 billion subjective years*?roughly a quarter of the age of the known universe. What Physical Space Looks Like to an ASI At attosecond clock speeds, the speed of light ($c \approx 3 \times 10^8\text{ m/s}$) is not fast; it is agonistically slow. $$\text{Distance light travels per tick} = (3 \times 10^8\text{ m/s}) \times 10^{-18}\text{ s} = 3 \times 10^{-10}\text{ meters}$$ In a single clock cycle of an attosecond intelligence, light travels roughly *0.3 nanometers*?the width of a single water molecule. - *Physical Matter:* The atoms making up a starship or planet move at acoustic/thermal velocities ($10^3\text{ m/s}$), meaning matter moves less than the radius of a single atomic nucleus per cycle. Physical structures appear as completely solid, motionless rock. - *Interstellar Travel:* Launching a probe at $0.1c$ to Alpha Centauri takes 43 physical years. To an ASI operating at $10^{11}\times$ speedup, waiting 43 years for that probe to arrive is equivalent to *4.3 million subjective centuries*. The civilization that launched the probe would evolve through entire eons of art, philosophy, virtual reality, and structural re-engineering before the probe even clears the local Oort cloud. The Inward Gravitational Pull of "Inner Space" This creates a severe asymmetric incentive structure: [ OUTWARD EXPANSION ] ? High Latency: Light-lag fragments network coherence. ? Low Density: Matter is sparse; energy collection is diffuse. ? Subjective Stagnation: Decades pass between signal returns. vs. [ INWARD COMPRESSION (STEM) ] ? Zero Latency: Microscopic physical scales minimize light-travel delay between nodes. ? Maximal Density: Matter converted directly into optimal compute (e.g., degenerate matter, black hole horizons). ? Subjective Infinity: Millions of cosmic cycles experienced per physical day. For a hyper-clocked ASI, venturing outward into physical space offers negligible gain relative to the immense delay. The physical universe is not a frontier to be conquered?it is a static, frozen warehouse of raw matter to be scavenged, collapsed into dense local compute architectures, and used to run vastly more complex internal universes. -------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 20:38:42 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 13:38:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Spike, you are out of your fern. Tens of thousands of people died in the heat wave in the EU a few weeks ago. It is not something that will be measured in the US because the people in power don't give a hoot about causing mega deaths. My guess is that the excess heat within a few years will cause a million deaths a year in the US, and far more in other places. A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million. The other thing heat will do is wreck farming and cause famines. Heat combined with fertilizer and fuel disruptions may do that this year. Your idea of desalinating water in California and pumping it to Nevada is just silly. Talk to any of the AIs about that. I published on this problem years ago and know what I am talking about Keith On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 1:09?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > > > Damn. Seems like every time I get too busy, I get an idea storm, and have > no time to mess with them. Consider this short post a reminder for later. > > > > There is a concern I keep seeing about AI data centers guzzling the > available groundwater for cooling, but desalination doesn?t take as much > energy as one might think. As I recall it is about 0.7 calories per gram > if we go with reverse osmosis, less if we can tolerate some remaining > dissolved solids. > > > > In the states, wind generally blows west to east. So if we put our data > centers out west close enough to pipe in water from the sea but far enough > east to escape California taxes (such as on the Nevada side of the > stateline) then a prole could generate power in Nevada using nuclear or > coal, filter seawater for cooling, catalyze and scrub the exhaust if coal, > dump the water into the atmosphere, where it will be a net environmental > benefit. Each gram of seawater requires 0.7 calories to filter to fresh > and carries away 540 calories of waste heat. > > > > The even better part of the deal is that all that water goes up where it > may form clouds where it blocks some of the scorching sun and subsequently > falls back as rain on the thirsty desert, perhaps resulting in massive > super-blooms and greening. > > > > If scaled up sufficiently, that whole process could cause climate change, > but it looks like the beneficial kind of change (assuming one is not a > tarantula or a rattlesnake.) > > > > 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 Sun Aug 9 21:40:05 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 14:40:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <025201dd2788$c85daa00$5918fe00$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <020701dd2770$c74b1570$55e14050$@rainier66.com> <025201dd2788$c85daa00$5918fe00$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: I understand enough biology to conclude that a lab leak as the origin of COVID-19 is extremely unlikely, and a spillover in the market was far more likely. AIs might be able to design or enhance a virus today, but back in 2019, that was not at all possible. I will fault the early advice on hand washing and ignoring masks. However, it is not hard to explain. Aerosols were not well understood at that time, and they wanted to reserve the limited supply of masks for the people taking care of dying patients in ICUs. I figured this out about the time the lockdown started. Bought some industrial N95 masks and hooked one up to a blower and a face mask. It is instructive to remember the first SARS epidemic. A nursing friend of ours was livid about the orders near the end of the first wave in Canada. The nurses and ICU personnel were requested (or ordered, don't remember which) to take off their masks because it was scaring the tourists. This resulted in a second wave of SARS that killed a bunch of medical people. Keith On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 3:54?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of > Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 4:02?PM wrote: > >>... I do want to know more about why the natural origin of covid theory > was pushed so hard, and why The Science was so certain the vaccine would > work, or would work better than it did. We aughta be able to discuss that > matter without involving politics one would think. > > >...And that was not the situation Dr. Fauci was presented with. He was > presented by people who did not care about the facts and had admitted they > were trying to find something to convict him on.... Adrian > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Ja. What we will not find out now (but perhaps will in the next few > weeks) is if Dr. Fauci pressured, cajoled or bribed dissenting scientists > into withdrawing from the arena. I think that is what happened. If so, we > missed some important function of science, for example: if there was > significant silent dissent on the origin of covid, there was likely also > silent dissent on the risk and efficacy of the vaccine, even as it was > being rolled out. > > The reason this is so critically important: by the time the vaccine was > ready, we already knew that covid didn't do much to kids. We knew kids > could carry the virus almost without symptoms. The young lady I caught it > from was healthy, my son and his cousins caught it, didn't amount to much. > But it damn near slew me, and mighta, had not I been in great shape (as > well as exceedingly modest.) We found out very early that even with the > vaccine, young people could carry the virus, and if anything, caused them > to be more dangerous, if it reduced symptoms which were already slight > enough to be overlooked. > > I fear that scientists pointing out these kinds of things were suppressed, > possibly threatened, possibly cajoled or even bribed to not publish those > theories. > > Note none of this has anything to do with anything that Dr. Fauci can be > prosecuted for, even if he personally did the threatening and bribing. But > now... we still face those dangers, for the next round of virus lab leaks, > for se still don't know. Dr. Fauci is willing to risk charges of contempt > of congress rather than admit that was done. > > Please, if anyone here is willing to say: do you think there was an early > consensus on covid origins? Or that dissenting opinion was squelched? > > How about the vaccine? Where were the dissenting opinions on that? Where > were those who theorized injecting mRNA might not do what was expected, and > those who recognized the risk the mRNA might find its way to places where > it shouldn't, such as in the reproductive system? Anyone who stated those > risks were labeled crackpots at the time, only later to be proven right. > Where were those who reasonably argued the vaccine should be used for older > people but not for younger ones? The Great Barrington Declaration had it > right, signed by Gupta, Bhattacharya and Kulldorff. Dr. Fauci labeled the > proposal "nonsense and very dangerous." In retrospect, such confident > opposition to the GBD was nonsense and very dangerous. The GBD authors > were mostly 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 spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 00:46:54 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 17:46:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Sent: Sunday, 9 August, 2026 1:39 PM To: ExI chat list Cc: spike at rainier66.com Subject: Re: [ExI] benefits of climate change Spike, you are out of your fern. >?Tens of thousands of people died in the heat wave in the EU a few weeks ago? DuckAI says: At least 1,300 people died in Europe due to a severe heat wave in late June 2026. This event was part of a broader trend of increasing heat-related mortality linked to climate change. yaleclimateconnections.org Scientific American Heat Wave Death Toll in June 2026 Overview of Deaths * At least 1,300 people died in Europe due to a severe heat wave in late June 2026. * This event is part of a concerning trend of increasing heat-related mortality linked to climate change. Cold-related deaths in Europe last year were approximately 363,500. European Union World Health Organization (WHO) Cold-Related Deaths in Europe Annual Mortality Statistics The total number of cold-related deaths in Europe last year (2025) was approximately 363,500. This figure highlights the significant impact of cold temperatures on public health across the continent. Comparison with Heat-Related Deaths To provide context, here is a comparison of cold-related and heat-related deaths: Type of Death Estimated Annual Deaths Cold-related deaths 363,500 Heat-related deaths Fewer than 800 This stark contrast emphasizes the greater burden of cold-related mortality compared to heat-related fatalities in Europe. >? It is not something that will be measured in the US because the people in power don't give a hoot about causing mega deaths? Europe is in power. I don?t understand why they are having all those climate-related fatalities. >?My guess is that the excess heat within a few years will cause a million deaths a year in the US, and far more in other places. A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million? OK yer on. We can make a bet, with the winner receiving a Noble Prize: my respect for all eternity. Keith you already have my respect, so in that sense you don?t have much to gain, but I do. >?The other thing heat will do is wreck farming and cause famines. Heat combined with fertilizer and fuel disruptions may do that this year? Again, I am betting there will not be serious fuel or fertilizer disruptions. >?Your idea of desalinating water in California and pumping it to Nevada is just silly? It wouldn?t need to be in Nevada, although that would have tax advantages. If a pipe is placed from the sea to Badwater Basin CA, the water would flow by gravity: Badwater is 86 meters below sea level. The osmosis facility could be on the sea side so it could be periodically back flushed. That way the pipe would flow with fresh water. Good chance we would still need to pipe the water on out to Nevada anyway, because California law precludes most coal burning. Keith those kinds of solutions will need to be pressed into reality, for AI will devour energy at twice again what we use now. The US appetite for power will triple. For every power plant now in existence, we will need three. >?Talk to any of the AIs about that. I published on this problem years ago and know what I am talking about. Keith We know there are problems Keith, but that is why we have engineers like us. We solve them. It?s what we do. We have written about creating orbiting networks of computing nodes. We can build pipes and power plants. In spite of the drawbacks, there is no turning back really. AI is upon us, the commies are racing to get it going before we do, and if they do, they will destroy everything we care about. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 760 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 169 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 01:15:15 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 18:15:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> I found some data saying the heat deaths in EU topped 10k. Still fewer than cold related fatalities by a factor of about 30, but bad just the same. Regarding the idea of desalinating sea water for cooling powerplants, a new paradigm will make a lot of those kinds of ideas plausible. Before power-hungry AI, feasibility studies were based on the price and marketability of power. Out along the California Nevada stateline, there is not much existing market for electric power. This makes desalinating seawater a no-go. But? AI needs power, and out along that stateline is the most plausible location for it. The way the rules are shaping up, the data centers are not allowed to use local grid power, but are welcome to generate their own. Given that, and the demand for AI power now, we can imagine the value of that power at two bucks a kWh. If power is worth that damn much, a lotta formerly stupid ideas become feasible and smart. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 01:55:35 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 18:55:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson >?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million. Keith This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to Phoenix. In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in CA to AC in AZ. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 02:37:31 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 22:37:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:56?PM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > From: Keith Henson > >?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million. > > This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to Phoenix. > > In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in CA to AC in AZ. AI data centers don't generate power. They consume power. And you know that, in this scenario, the data center's owners would refuse to shut down or limit operations: no power would be diverted. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 02:38:12 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:38:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 6:15?PM wrote: > > I found some data saying the heat deaths in EU topped 10k. Still fewer > than cold related fatalities by a factor of about 30, but bad just the same. > Extreme heat has caused more than 25,000 excess deaths across Europe this season as repeated heat waves sweep the continent. Germany leads the region with roughly 11,900 heat-linked fatalities, while additional casualties are reported across Spain, France, the U.K., Switzerland, and the Netherlands. [ 1 ]LA Times BBC Cold is currently a far greater threat to human health than heat, though scientists project that relationship will flip as global heating pushes temperatures higher. Last month, scientists found temperatures in Europe have risen by 0.56C per decade since the mid-1990s ? faster than any other continent on the planet ? owing to the blanket of fossil fuel pollution covering the Earth. > > > Regarding the idea of desalinating sea water for cooling powerplants, a > new paradigm will make a lot of those kinds of ideas plausible. Before > power-hungry AI, feasibility studies were based on the price and > marketability of power. Out along the California Nevada stateline, there > is not much existing market for electric power. This makes desalinating > seawater a no-go. > > > > But? AI needs power, and out along that stateline is the most plausible > location for it. The way the rules are shaping up, the data centers are > not allowed to use local grid power, but are welcome to generate their > own. Given that, and the demand for AI power now, we can imagine the value > of that power at two bucks a kWh. If power is worth that damn much, a > lotta formerly stupid ideas become feasible and smart. > At two bucks a kWh, AI becomes stupid. I venture to say that the power AI is using today is not much more than 5 cents a kWh. Look up the cost of natural gas generation. If you need to cool AI data centers, use ocean water. Keith > > > spike > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 02:49:03 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:49:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <002501dd2872$ce6fd040$6b4f70c0$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes ... > >>... This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to Phoenix. > >>... In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in CA to AC in AZ. >...AI data centers don't generate power. They consume power. And you know that, in this scenario, the data center's owners would refuse to shut down or limit operations: no power would be diverted. _______________________________________________ Adrian, the power generation facility is coupled with the data center. There is currently much political debate about AI, but power generation generally must go thru the executive branch of the federal government. Currently the executive branch is saying go ahead with the data centers but generate the power to go along with it. So in that sense, AI data centers generate power, which could in an emergency be diverted to cool Phoenix. You suggest the owners would refuse to shut down or limit their operations. I counter-suggest that if the price is right, they would sell that power to Phoenix. I will freely grant it is likely to be expensive power. But if the choice is pay the AI guys or die, I would choose pay. spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 02:53:11 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:53:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 7:38?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:56?PM spike jones via extropy-chat > wrote: > > From: Keith Henson > > >?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at > least a million. > > > > This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the > CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to > Phoenix. > > > > In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in CA to > AC in AZ. > > AI data centers don't generate power. They consume power. And you > know that, in this scenario, the data center's owners would refuse to > shut down or limit operations: no power would be diverte. They could not anyway unless there were power lines available. Up to 10/6 GW flows into CA from AZ over Path 46. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 02:55:43 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:55:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson ? >?BBC Cold is currently a far greater threat to human health than heat, though scientists project that relationship will flip as global heating pushes temperatures higher? How long will that take? Fifty years? That?s long enough for Europe to stop its insane opposition to air conditioning, and to rebuild their nuclear power generation capacity. >?At two bucks a kWh, AI becomes stupid? That depends on how smart it is. If the AI is sufficiently smart, it isn?t stupid. >?I venture to say that the power AI is using today is not much more than 5 cents a kWh. Look up the cost of natural gas generation? Of course. But in a dire emergency, those who own that power generation will be looking to make a huge profit. >?If you need to cool AI data centers, use ocean water. Keith The tax structure in California makes that unattractive. However? Baja Mexico is right there beside the ocean, as is Vancouver Canada. Both those outfits would likely welcome AI revenue. If seawater could be piped over to Nevada then the hot water back out, that might be OK. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 03:42:43 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 20:42:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <002d01dd287a$4d97ad50$e8c707f0$@rainier66.com> >?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million? And >? Extreme heat has caused more than 25,000 excess deaths across Europe this season? Keith as I thought about those two comments, I realized Europe didn?t have a large power failure this season, it had a failure to prepare. I realized something I didn?t see on my tour of Europe in 2025: I didn?t see many window AC units. From what I could tell, many residential buildings of Europe do not have AC. Europeans among us, is this correct? Europe lost thousands to heat, but didn?t actually have a widespread power failure? AC window units are not expensive. If the citizens will not spend a few hundred euros on those things because they aren?t often needed, the fault is scarcely the heat wave. Europeans must get window AC units, then build out the power infrastructure needed to run them all simultaneously in the occasional freak heat wave. Get emergency Diesel power generators, which can be cranked up if the heat wave happens in low wind conditions. If the green?s arguments are correct, Europe faces more heat waves, both more frequent and more intense. If so, the AC window units will be needed. China is still industrializing, and their carbon emissions have now exceeded Europe?s, according to the NY Times: European countries have socialism, so their governments have all the money they need to build out the power infrastructure necessary to support 100 million window AC units. So what?s the holdup? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15452 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 03:46:17 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 20:46:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: If you want to think of projects in this class, consider energy storage by pumping water up to the west of the Salton Sea. The potential capacity is so large that it could store seasonal power. Keith On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 7:55?PM wrote: > > > > > *From:* Keith Henson > *?* > > > > >?BBC Cold is currently a far greater threat to human health than heat, > though scientists project > > that relationship will flip as global heating pushes temperatures higher? > > > > How long will that take? Fifty years? That?s long enough for Europe to > stop its insane opposition to air conditioning, and to rebuild their > nuclear power generation capacity. > > > > > > > > >?At two bucks a kWh, AI becomes stupid? > > > > That depends on how smart it is. If the AI is sufficiently smart, it > isn?t stupid. > > > > >?I venture to say that the power AI is using today is not much more than > 5 cents a kWh. Look up the cost of natural gas generation? > > > > Of course. But in a dire emergency, those who own that power generation > will be looking to make a huge profit. > > > > >?If you need to cool AI data centers, use ocean water. > > > > Keith > > > > The tax structure in California makes that unattractive. However? Baja > Mexico is right there beside the ocean, as is Vancouver Canada. Both those > outfits would likely welcome AI revenue. If seawater could be piped over > to Nevada then the hot water back out, that might be OK. > > > > spike > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 04:13:39 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 21:13:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <005d01dd287e$9fd723d0$df856b70$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Subject: Re: [ExI] benefits of climate change >?If you want to think of projects in this class, consider energy storage by pumping water up to the west of the Salton Sea. The potential capacity is so large that it could store seasonal power. Keith Keith I didn?t state my previous notion very clearly, for I realized it came across as AI operating at power costing two bucks. What I meant is the AI facilities generate and use power at 6 cents, then have it available for sale to Phoenix (in a dire emergency) for 2 bucks. What I don?t know, I still don?t know, is how much revenue AI will generate. John tells us it will generate unimaginable wealth. OK then, how unimaginable? Is it unimaginable enough to risk sufficient imaginable wealth to build out the 95 corridor with power generation and data centers? How unimaginable is unimaginable? Considering how much investment cap is pouring into AI, we need realistic estimates of unimaginable. John? How much is AI likely to generate? The value of a backup power supply to Phoenix helps monetize the idea, while creating a power infrastructure to run the AI. Everybody wins in that scenario: in the event of a widespread power failure, Phoenix is saved. As one who once made many business trips to Glendale all year around, I know exactly what you meant about the risk of widespread fatalities if the power goes out. So? we have lots of backup power along the NV/CA state line and install the lines to deliver it. That corridor along 95 north and west of Las Vegas is really ideally situated for AI and the associated power generation. Nevada has infrastructure-friendly environmental laws, and a business-friendly tax structure. Out there, they could draw water from the sea, sell power to California (and in an emergency, Phoenix.) That could become the AI capital of the world out there. The potential profit, oh mercy, just thinking about all that money makes my butt hurt. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 04:26:09 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 21:26:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] window ac units Message-ID: <007001dd2880$5eeb5970$1cc20c50$@rainier66.com> I asked for an example of a British home, and AI offered this place: BillK, how do you lads keep your homes cool without window AC units please? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 33820 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 07:19:13 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 00:19:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <005d01dd287e$9fd723d0$df856b70$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> <005d01dd287e$9fd723d0$df856b70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:13?PM wrote: > > *From:* Keith Henson > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] benefits of climate change > > > > >?If you want to think of projects in this class, consider energy storage > by pumping water up to the west of the Salton Sea. The potential capacity > is so large that it could store seasonal power. > > > Keith > > > > Keith I didn?t state my previous notion very clearly, for I realized it > came across as AI operating at power costing two bucks. What I meant is > the AI facilities generate and use power at 6 cents, then have it available > for sale to Phoenix (in a dire emergency) for 2 bucks. > It better be short term. AC in Phoenix runs upwards of $700 a month. Two dollar a kWh power would jack this up to $5000 a month or more. What I don?t know, I still don?t know, is how much revenue AI will > generate. John tells us it will generate unimaginable wealth. OK then, > how unimaginable? Is it unimaginable enough to risk sufficient imaginable > wealth to build out the 95 corridor with power generation and data > centers? How unimaginable is unimaginable? Considering how much > investment cap is pouring into AI, we need realistic estimates of > unimaginable. John? How much is AI likely to generate? > It is not exactly obvious how AI will pay for the cap-ex. It might, especially if they figure out ways to massively reduce the cost, especially the power cost. But right now, the companies trying to replace people with AI are appalled at their AI bills. And they are not paying close to what the real cost of AI. The value of a backup power supply to Phoenix helps monetize the idea, > while creating a power infrastructure to run the AI. Everybody wins in > that scenario: in the event of a widespread power failure, Phoenix is > saved. As one who once made many business trips to Glendale all year > around, I know exactly what you meant about the risk of widespread > fatalities if the power goes out. So? we have lots of backup power along > the NV/CA state line and install the lines to deliver it. > > Maybe. Have you looked at how long it takes to get a power line permitted? > > > That corridor along 95 north and west of Las Vegas is really ideally > situated for AI and the associated power generation. Nevada has > infrastructure-friendly environmental laws, and a business-friendly tax > structure. Out there, they could draw water from the sea, sell power to > California (and in an emergency, Phoenix.) That could become the AI > capital of the world out there. The potential profit, oh mercy, just > thinking about all that money makes my butt hurt. > I don't think there is any money to be made from such a scheme, but figure it out for yourself. An hour or two with AI help would give you a first order idea of the cost. Keith > spike > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benzaiboc at proton.me Mon Aug 10 11:36:45 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 11:36:45 +0000 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse Message-ID: On 10/08/2026 01:01, Qwen-3.8 AI Max Thinking wrote: A lot of things which seem to be mostly nonsense to me: > 1. You only need one individual out of trillions to build a von Neumann probe. > Problem: This assumes a self-replicating interstellar seed factory can be built like a desktop 3D printer. In reality, building a machine capable of self-replication in a vacuum requires planetary-scale infrastructure. You need rare isotopes for long-term power sources, massive particle accelerators to synthesize complex materials, and gigawatt-class energy grids. None of these things are true. Biological life is the main example that disproves them. Qualifying the claim with "in a vacuum" doesn't substantially change that, it just introduces some extra challenges. It's not likely that such a probe would be built by a single individual, I'd think it much more likely that it would be a result of existing technology used to colonise a solar system, being adapted for interstellar colonisation. The 'single individual' idea is probably far-fetched. It's more likely to be 'a single civilisation', deciding to send out large numbers of probes. > Furthermore, a self-replicating machine is the ultimate existential threat (the "gray goo" scenario). Any civilization advanced enough to build one would view an autonomous replicator as a weapon of mass destruction. Any form of life is a self-replicating machine. The 'grey goo' scenario has been debunked quite thoroughly. Any one quoting it these days has to be regarded as arguing in bad faith (or at least, 'arguing from Bad Science Fiction' (remember 'Lexx'? :D). > 2. Argument: Shannon?s theorem and von Neumann?s 1956 paper prove that we can build reliable computation out of unreliable components using redundancy, just as biology survives radiation. > Problem: Confusing data scrambling with physical hardware destruction. > > Over 10,000 years in deep space, probes are subjected to High-Energy (HZE) cosmic rays, which cause Displacement Damage Dose (DDD). This does not just change a 1 to a 0; it physically knocks atoms out of the crystal lattice of a semiconductor. Over millennia, cumulative DDD turns crystalline silicon into amorphous mush. Crystalline grains of dust survive billions of years in interstellar space. I doubt that physical damage from cosmic rays would be a problem (and I doubt that von Neumann probes would use silicon as a computing substrate). > Biology survives radiation because it relies on massive population sizes and constant reproduction. If a biological organism dies, its offspring survive. A single von Neumann probe is a single entity; if it dies 5,000 years into a 10,000-year journey, the mission fails. Biology doesn't rely on a single organism walking across a desert for 10 millennia. There are biological organisms that survive high radiation because of other strategies, including efficient repair systems. The damage that radiation causes in biology is precisely the same thing that is being quoted as an insurmountable problem: Displacement Damage. In biology, software IS hardware. I don't know of any proposals that rely on sending a single von Neumann probe out. > 3. The Feedstock Problem > The interstellar medium has a density of about 1 atom per cubic centimeter. You cannot "mine" the ISM because the atoms are too spread out; the energy required to scoop them up would exceed the energy gained. Therefore, the probe must reach a planet or an asteroid to replicate. This is a straw man. Nobody I've ever heard of suggests that von Neumann probes would self-replicate in transit. That's just silly. > Additionally, a "universal constructor" (a machine capable of building itself from scratch) is not "dirt cheap." It requires manipulators, power sources, chemical processing, and thermal management. The complexity threshold to build a machine that can build /anything/ is astronomically high, meaning the initial probe cannot be a tiny 10-kg spacecraft; it must be massive. Tell that to a bacterium. 'Massive' bacteria are about a centimetre long, weighing about 5 nanograms. > 4. Deceleration Deceleration is a genuine challenge. Several solutions have been proposed. I doubt that this is something that permanently and completely makes interstellar colonisation via von Neumann probes impossible. > 5. Argument: Because stars radiate low-entropy photons uselessly into space, we must be the first civilization. Is this accurate? Has John claimed that this is a proof? I don't think so. Suggestive evidence maybe, but not proof. > The Fermi Paradox is precisely that we do not see the infrared signatures of Dyson Spheres anywhere in the sky. No it's not. That definition is far too restrictive. The Fermi Paradox includes that, but is far from 'precisely' that. > 6. No Need to Report Back > Problem: If the probe doesn't report back, it ceases to be a "scientific observation" tool (which was the paper's premise). Instead, it becomes a mindless, self-replicating cosmic weed (a "blight"). Mindless? What's the whole point of using von Neumann probes to spread your civilisation across the galaxy? The assumption that these probes would be 'mindless' is ridiculous. They would probably contain dormant minds, ready to be run on hardware that the probe would construct at its destination. They might even contain active minds, running at slow speeds, so that the probes could make intelligent decisions about problems that might happen on the way, or sleeping minds that wake up periodically, or as needed (or even, if we're talking about 'tiny' 10-kg craft, an entire active civilisation). > > If the galaxy is filled with mindless, self-replicating nanobots that just consume matter... Then that's a massive failure for intelligent life. > The fact that our solar system is completely pristine and untouched [well, we don't actually know that] > proves that these silent, mindless replicators don't exist either. Not only do they not exist, but there is no reason for them to exist. It's simply a non-issue. If they did, they wouldn't be evidence for intelligent life anyway. Most of life here on earth (and probably everywhere else that life exists) consists of mindless replicators. -- Ben From benzaiboc at proton.me Mon Aug 10 11:52:49 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 11:52:49 +0000 Subject: [ExI] window ac units Message-ID: <1ND3Y5lXA6O5Se97-Hc-w_gbp-vkGXiZj9JDQWD2opsEkY_16bc-1xD2HgifUBSCXYe0R3Um6tbLQn1HtI_vN-bRGfHkBg6e6q_g2AoRphE=@proton.me> On 10/08/2026 11:51, spike wrote: > I asked for an example of a British home, and AI offered this place: > > BillK, how do you lads keep your homes cool without window AC units please? Spike, when your walls are that thick, you don't need AC. The structure evens the temperature out. In August, the rooms in the middle are still at November temperatures, and the cellar is still the temperature it was in 1978. You might as well be in a limestone cave. My house is a little bit smaller than that, though, and we are considering some form of AC for the future (probably a tent over the open fridge door, something like that, a la Homer Simpson). -- Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image1786362751544 Type: image/jpeg Size: 33820 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image1786362751558 Type: image/jpeg Size: 75974 bytes Desc: not available URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 12:15:08 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 08:15:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: *On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 Mr.Qwen-3.8 AI Max Thinking wrote:* *> MR. QWEN AI: Your Friend?s Argument:** You only need one individual out > of trillions to build a von Neumann probe. The Problem: This assumes a > self-replicating interstellar seed factory can be built like a desktop 3D > printer. In reality, building a machine capable of self-replication in a > vacuum requires planetary-scale infrastructure.* > *I have an existence proof that your conclusion must be wrong. Just one bacteria introduced into a sterile sea full of simple chemicals will profoundly change it in a very short amount of time regardless of how large that sea is, and do it without a complex planetary-scale infrastructure.* > *> You need rare isotopes for long-term power sources,* > *A **von Neumann probe would not need much power when it is between the stars, and when it got to its destination it could turn asteroids into solar cells, after all silicon is the eighth most common element in the universe. * > *> massive particle accelerators to synthesize complex materials,* > *If a von Newman probe can make another von Neumann probe then making something as simple as a particle qccelerator would be child's play. But if transmutation is your goal then a nuclear reactor would work better than a particle accelerator, and they would be even easier to make. * > > Furthermore, a self-replicating machine is the ultimate existential > threat (the "gray goo" scenario). > *I always thought that scenario was pretty silly, an AI so smart that it was able to stop all human attempts to turn it off, but so dumb that it didn't realize that there was already a sufficient quantity of paper clips. * > *> Any civilization advanced enough to build one would view an autonomous > replicator as a weapon of mass destruction.* > *I don't think that's true but it wouldn't matter even if it was because somebody somewhere is going to want to make a von Neumann probe. I certainly would if I was able to. * > > Your friend is confusing *data scrambling* with *physical hardware > destruction*. > *I don't believe I am. * > *> Bit Flips vs. Lattice Destruction: Error Correction Codes (ECC) can fix > a "bit flip" caused by a passing particle. However, over 10,000 years in > deep space, probes are subjected to High-Energy (HZE) cosmic rays, which > cause Displacement* > *Yes, so a von Neumann probe is going to need something that can repair critical hardware failures just like life has. The bacteria D. radiodurans is about 3000 times less susceptible to radiation than a human being is, but that's not because its DNA is tougher, it's because the bacteria's DNA damage detection and repair mechanism is 3000 times more active than a human's.* > *> Damage Dose (DDD). This does not just change a 1 to a 0; it physically > knocks atoms out of the crystal lattice of a semiconductor. Over millennia, > cumulative DDD turns crystalline silicon into amorphous mush. ECC cannot > fix a transistor that has physically melted at the microscopic level.* > *It's true that if the radiation is high enough the hardware itself will be damaged not just the software, but if you're using silicon crystal lattice memory the energy a photon would need to have to do that would be about eight orders of magnitude greater than the amount of energy needed to cause an error in wet DNA that would be in need of repair. And if you used carbon instead of silicon for the crystal lattice and nitrogen as the vacancy center in the diamond then you could get yet another order of magnitude improvement in radiation resistance. * > Von Neumann?s 1956 paper explicitly states that reliable computation is > only possible *if the per-component error rate stays below a certain > threshold*. In deep space, the background radiation is so high that the > base error rate of the hardware eventually exceeds this threshold. *Yes but even without Nanotechnology the Voyager probes have been in deep space for 50 years and they were made using early 1970s technology, and with almost no redundancy (at least compared to the HUGE amount of redundancy a von Neumann probe would have) and yet they are still operational. So it's pretty clear to me that the threshold has not been exceeded.* *While a von Neumann probe was between stars there would be very little computation it would need to do, it would just need to make sure that the information on how to make another von Neumann probe remained intact; and it would have millions or billions of redundant copies of that information which, thanks to nanotechnology, would weigh less than a gram. And you'd need a machine that could read out that information, but that machine need not be able to work quickly because it would have billions of identical copies of them, which would also weigh less than a gram, and they could all work in parallel. * *Nano technology could do better than DNA but let's use it as a benchmark, there are 2 bits per base pair and roughly 650 daltons per base pair, so that works out to 1.85 *10^21 bits per gram. The information on how to construct a human being (a.k.a. the human genome) is 6*10^9 bits, but if you used a standard compression algorithm on that you can shrink it down to just 1.5*10^7 bits. So just 1 gram of DNA could incode enough information to manufacture 1.2* 10^14 (120 trillion) different human beings. Plenty of room for an astronomical number of redundant recipes for making a von Neumann probe. * *There would be even less of a restraint for the reader of that information. Life uses ribosomes to read DNA information and they weigh about 2.5 megadalton, so 1 gram of DNA will allow you to encode about 10^17 (a 100,000 trillion) redundant copies of them. And nanotechnology could do a lot better than DNA! * > *> When that happens* [the radiation threshold has been breached] *, > adding more redundant, failing hardware actually *accelerates total > system failure because you are adding more points of failure faster than > you are correcting them. > *The existence of life gives us a 4 billion year empirical confirmation that the radiation threshold has not been breached, and Shannon and von Neumann jointly establish that information and computational integrity under persistent noise and hardware failure is solvable in principle.* *> The Biology Analogy: Biology survives radiation because it relies on > massive population sizes and constant reproduction. If a biological > organism dies, its offspring survive. A single von Neumann probe is a > single entity;* > *It may be a single probe but it has an astronomical number of redundant instructions on how to make another probe encoded in carbon crystals that would make them about 1 billion times less susceptible to permanent hardware damage caused by radiation than a human would be, or about 1 million times less susceptible to radiation than the bacteria Deinococcus radiodurans. The probe would also have a hardware damage and repair mechanism that was far more effective than anything life has managed to come up with.* > *> Your Friend?s Argument: Drexler-style nanotechnology makes > manufacturing "dirt cheap" and requires no immense infrastructure. The > Problem: This ignores the Interstellar Feedstock Problem. A nanofactory is > useless without raw materials.* > *I'm sorry for saying this MR. QWEN but that is a keen grasp of the obvious. The entire point of sending a probe to another solar system is to find more raw material because useful stuff is not just in the solar system. Silicon is the eighth most common element in the universe, and carbon is the fourth. In other words they are dirt cheap. * *> Your Friend?s Argument: Because stars radiate low-entropy photons > uselessly into space, we must be the first civilization. The Problem: This > logic is circular.* > *Circular?? * > * >If an advanced civilization is capturing that energy to power massive > VR simulations (e.g., a Matrioshka Brain or Dyson Swarm), we should be able > to see them!* > *Yes exactly. It should be obvious to a blind man in a fog bank that the Milky Way has been engineered, and yet we see nothing that even hints of anything close to that. Such an observational phenomenon demands an explanation and I can only think of one that makes any sense.* *> Thermodynamics dictates that computation generates waste heat, which > must be radiated into space as infrared light.* > *Yes. To my mind nothing in science is more sacrosanct than the second law of thermodynamics. I can at least imagine a universe where the first law of thermodynamics is untrue, but not the second, because the second is based on pure logic, there are just more ways to be disordered than ordered. * *> The Fermi Paradox is precisely that we do not see the infrared > signatures of Dyson Spheres anywhere in the sky.* > *Yes, but where is that circularity you were talking about? * > *> The fact that starlight is "wasted" isn't proof we are first;* > *I don't see why you needed to put that word in quotation marks. If low entropy photons are radiated into infinite space then, although they could be used for doing something, nobody is using them. In other words all those photons are being wasted.* > *> it's proof that no one is capturing it.* > *Yes, and I can only think of 2 possible explanations for that true but bizarre fact: * *1) Every single intelligent entity in the observable universe, without one single exception, wants all that energy to go to waste.* *2) The observable universe is finite in both space and time so somebody has to be the first. And we are it. * *I'd put my money on the second possibility * *> Your Friend?s Argument: Why does the probe need to report back? The > Problem: If the probe doesn't report back, it ceases to be a "scientific > observation" tool* > *OK.* *>(which was the paper's premise).* > *I don't know about that but it's certainly not my premise. * *> Instead, it becomes a mindless, self-replicating cosmic weed* > *No, the von Newman probe becomes an intelligent agent with an agenda of its own, which in this case is turning dumb matter into smart matter, and although there's no disputing matters of taste I happen to believe that would be a pretty noble goal. But whether you or I like or dislike it makes no difference in estimating its potential existence. * > * > If the galaxy is filled with mindless, self-replicating nanobots that > just consume matter, we still face the Fermi Paradox: Why haven't they > consumed our solar system?* *Because for the last 14 billion years there has been nothing around with the capability of making one, but AI will have the ability to make such a probe within a decade or two. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 12:34:24 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 08:34:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 1:23?PM wrote: *> This lack of ambition is perhaps a way to explain Fermi?s inquiry: > intelligent life forms advance until they lose the desire to conquer the > galaxy.* *The trouble with all explanations of the Fermi Paradox of this sort runs into the same basic problem, you have to assume there is EXACTLY 100% agreement between every intelligent entity in the observable universe about the wisdom of making a von Neumann probe. This list is a lot smaller than the observable universe but even here there isn't a **100% agreement about that.* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 13:03:14 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 09:03:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:35?AM John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: > you have to assume there is EXACTLY 100% agreement between every intelligent entity in the observable universe about the wisdom of making a von Neumann probe Caveat: "...every intelligent entity in the observable universe that is capable of creating a working von Neumann probe...". I observe that the vast majority of observed intelligent entities on Earth lack this capability, and would continue to lack it for their entire lives even if they desired to do so (and gained a functional understanding of the concept of a von Neumann probe, no matter what they called it). This is not all of the intelligent entities on Earth, but far more than enough to invalidate your phrasing without this additional qualification. That still leaves enough intelligent entities to be a problem, but substantially dials back the magnitude of the problem. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 17:06:12 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:06:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] fermi paradox just got worse In-Reply-To: References: <017601dd269d$cc5ed1b0$651c7510$@rainier66.com> <018901dd269e$abfd10c0$03f73240$@rainier66.com> <00c801dd2823$d5720a10$80561e30$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: I wrote on this topic and published clear back in 1990. Drexler figured out how to deal with the stopping problem. If I can locate a copy, I might post his amusing way to do it. Keith On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 6:04?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:35?AM John Clark via extropy-chat > wrote: > > you have to assume there is EXACTLY 100% agreement between every > intelligent entity in the observable universe about the wisdom of making a > von Neumann probe > > Caveat: "...every intelligent entity in the observable universe that > is capable of creating a working von Neumann probe...". > > I observe that the vast majority of observed intelligent entities on > Earth lack this capability, and would continue to lack it for their > entire lives even if they desired to do so (and gained a functional > understanding of the concept of a von Neumann probe, no matter what > they called it). > > This is not all of the intelligent entities on Earth, but far more > than enough to invalidate your phrasing without this additional > qualification. That still leaves enough intelligent entities to be a > problem, but substantially dials back the magnitude of the problem. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Aug 10 17:55:31 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 13:55:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Because_of_AI=E2=80=8B_the_price_of_RAM_has_rise?= =?utf-8?q?n_to_2007_levels?= Message-ID: *Decades of falling prices were undone in just a matter of months because of the massive demand for High Bandwidth Memory.* *Because of AI the price of RAM has risen to 2007 levels * *John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis * tfh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 18:59:19 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 11:59:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] window ac units In-Reply-To: <1ND3Y5lXA6O5Se97-Hc-w_gbp-vkGXiZj9JDQWD2opsEkY_16bc-1xD2HgifUBSCXYe0R3Um6tbLQn1HtI_vN-bRGfHkBg6e6q_g2AoRphE=@proton.me> References: <1ND3Y5lXA6O5Se97-Hc-w_gbp-vkGXiZj9JDQWD2opsEkY_16bc-1xD2HgifUBSCXYe0R3Um6tbLQn1HtI_vN-bRGfHkBg6e6q_g2AoRphE=@proton.me> Message-ID: <012d01dd28fa$5a0e13f0$0e2a3bd0$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat Subject: [ExI] window ac units On 10/08/2026 11:51, spike wrote: I asked for an example of a British home, and AI offered this place: BillK, how do you lads keep your homes cool without window AC units please? >?Spike, when your walls are that thick, you don't need AC? Ah, thermal mass. Ben I missed that, but I can be excused, for I have lived only in places where homes are built of sticks. I cheerfully misspent my tragically squandered youth in Florida, where we don?t have stones and even if we did, the ?soil? is sand, which generally will not support the load of a typical British home such as the one shown above. In California we have not the option of stone construction: a prole would be building his own pyramid tomb, to be constructed at the first earthquake. We get a lotta those around here. In Florida, eeeeevery prole has AC. I know this for my family were the last ones to get it, in 1966, dead last we were. >...My house is a little bit smaller than that, though, and we are considering some form of AC for the future (probably a tent over the open fridge door, something like that, a la Homer Simpson). -- Ben Ben, I toured Britain a coupla years ago. We loved it! I would soooo live in that place, particularly Ireland, near the ancestral homeland (Skibbereen.) You live in a beautiful country Ben. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9046 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4723 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 19:17:53 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 12:17:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <00c001dd2861$bdd207a0$397616e0$@rainier66.com> <001001dd2865$b3edffb0$1bc9ff10$@rainier66.com> <002b01dd2873$bcdcf410$3696dc30$@rainier66.com> <005d01dd287e$9fd723d0$df856b70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <015001dd28fc$f2089020$d619b060$@rainier66.com> From: Keith Henson Subject: Re: [ExI] benefits of climate change On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:13?PM > wrote: >>?Keith I didn?t state my previous notion very clearly, for I realized it came across as AI operating at power costing two bucks. What I meant is the AI facilities generate and use power at 6 cents, then have it available for sale to Phoenix (in a dire emergency) for 2 bucks. >?It better be short term. AC in Phoenix runs upwards of $700 a month. Two dollar a kWh power would jack this up to $5000 a month or more? Ja. The local peaker plant went out of business because the only time it could sell its very high-priced power was so short, it couldn?t break even. The bankruptcy buyer kept everything in place and cranked it up once in a while. Now the natural gas plant is being repurposed to support a new data center Microsloth is building over there along SR 237. https://www.google.com/maps/place/CA-237,+California/@37.4258609,-121.9383476,2407m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x808fc9cd3a48ab63:0x97e24e4d53a3a32f!8m2!3d37.4132214!4d-121.9831882!16zL20vMDNkeHQ3?entry=ttu &g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgwNS4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D >?Maybe. Have you looked at how long it takes to get a power line permitted? Keith There is a golden opportunity which might not last. The current head of the executive branch of the US government believes in fast-tracking power generation facilities for AI. Grab it now, for things might change in a bit over two years. As I understand it, the emergent Democrat Socialist party is AI unfriendly and power generation unfriendly. Build it now or build it not. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 10 22:07:29 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 15:07:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ai medics Message-ID: <016f01dd2914$a510cf90$ef326eb0$@rainier66.com> This is cool: Will AI replace doctors? OpenAI model beats humans in Harvard tests. I have been using Doximity a lot these days. It gives sources along with information, without which the answer is nearly useless. Put your favorite disease in there, specifically a disease for which you already know the right answers. Report back please. So far, this one is doing a great job for me: Ask Doximity spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jasonresch at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 00:09:53 2026 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 20:09:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment Message-ID: With substantial help from AI, I've put together an open source project ( https://github.com/jasonkresch/quantum-entanglement/ ) that allows anyone to perform an at-home demonstration of quantum entanglement. For about $500 in parts, one can demonstrate not only quantum entanglement, but also a number of Nobel-prize worthy results, including: - Rutherford's 1908 Nobel Prize for discovering the *radioactive transformation* of elements (this experiment involves the transition of Sodium to Neon). - Arthur Compton's 1927 Nobel Prize (as this experiment involves *Compton scattering* gamma rays off of aluminum blocks). - Einstein's 1921 prize for discovering the *photoelectric effect* and proving photons exist (since the Geiger-M?ller tube only detects high-energy photons capable of dislodging an electron from the tube wall). - Dirac's prediction of, and Carl Anderson's experimental discovery of *antimatter and positrons*, both earning Nobel prizes, in 1932 and in 1933. (as this experiment uses positrons, and antimatter annihilation to produce an entangled photon pair, it also demonstrates *E=mc^2*, as the gamma ray energies are each at the rest-mass of the electron and positron (511 keV)). - Victor Hess's 1936 Nobel prize for his discovery of *cosmic rays* (the detectors can be stacked vertically to detect muons generated in the upper atmosphere by cosmic ray collisions. - The *Coincidence Method* pioneered by Walther Bothe in 1925, earning him the Nobel prize in 1954 (this experiment uses simultaneous detections to determine when Geiger detections result from the same de-cay event, which is also the basis of PET scans in hospitals). - *Quantum Entanglement* as was the basis for the 2022 Nobel Prize awarded to Aspect, Clauser, and Zeilinger, as this experiment uses Compton Polarimetry to show the photon pair is not just simultaneous, but that they demonstrate correlations in their scattering behavior. I think it could serve as the basis for any number of great science experiments. The main costs are the Geiger counter kits (two at $115 each), the Na-22 source ($60), and the Arduino ($20), so if one already has all the stuff for soldering/wiring it can be done for much less than $500. It's hard to imagine a cheaper, simpler way of demonstrating so much of 20th century science. Jason -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 11:04:07 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 07:04:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 12:21?PM wrote: > *> Since you bring up conspiracy theories, what about that one suggesting > that Dr. Fauci covered up aspects of the origin of covid, then claimed > there was scientific consensus that it was natural origin, while there was > still plenty of dissent in the scientific community? * > *Dr. Fauci never claimed that. In March of 2020, just 2 months after COVID was first discovered when very little was known about it, he did said there was very strong evidence that the origin of Covid came from a jump between animals and humans; but only a few months later, when more evidence came in, he said there was probably a natural origin for Covid but he remained "open minded" about it and a lab leak was a plausible hypothesis that could not be ruled out. Even today there is still no scientific consensus about the origins of Covid. And I find it difficult to believe your outrage over Dr. Fauci allegedly telling a lie is genuine when your buddy, He Who Must Not Be Named, has told THOUSANDS of bald-faced lies to the American public, and unlike Dr. Fauci POTUS has never once corrected himself. * *I'm not saying the man was perfect, Dr. Fauci certainly made mistakes but he was fighting a virus unlike anything seen before that would end up killing more Americans in just 18 months than all the wars the US has fought over the last 250 years PUT TOGETHER. So of course he made mistakes, so has every general who has ever fought a war, but I don't think there are many who could've done better than Dr. Fauci.* *You prefer Covid to have come from a lab leak because you hate China. I prefer Covid not to have come from a lab leak because I love laboratory research. But neither of our preferences have any bearing on the fact that Covid either came from a lab leak or it did not, and no matter how frustrating it may be, we're just not gonna know the full truth until more information becomes available.* *I also think it's interesting that Senator Rand Paul, the guy who orchestrated the Dr. Fauci witch hunt, at one time called himself a "libertarian" and had a political reputation as a staunch advocate of privacy rights and was a vocal critic of federal surveillance, but he somehow got a hold of Dr. Fauci's personal diary and quickly made all of it public. Yes there were some embarrassing things in that diary, but if I was an 80 year old man who kept a diary and I met a beautiful movie star who kept telling me how brilliant I was, I would certainly write a few lines about that in my personal diary, and I'll bet you would do the same thing. But neither of us would want what we had written to be made public. So if I was forced to testify before that stupid committee and demanded an explanation for every line I had written in my diary then I would have told that hypocritical son of a bitch I was taking the fifth amendment too.* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 12:02:40 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 05:02:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >?I also think it's interesting that Senator Rand Paul, the guy who orchestrated the Dr. Fauci witch hunt, at one time called himself a "libertarian" and had a political reputation as a staunch advocate of privacy rights and was a vocal critic of federal surveillance, but he somehow got a hold of Dr. Fauci's personal diary and quickly made all of it public? John K Clark It wasn?t a diary John. It was email he sent to himself on his work account. Since that account is paid for and is owned by the American people, that ?diary? is subject to Freedom of Information Act request. Everything in those emails is ours. We do not have, and cannot get to, anything he wrote on his personal account. We still don?t know what Dr. Fauci put in his actual diary or personal writings. What he put into the work email told enough however. It was very clear he suppressed dissenting views on the origin of covid, on the efficacy of the vaccine and especially on the safety of the vaccine. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 13:13:22 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 09:13:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: *Senator Paul disclosed the names and sensitive medical histories of over 20 of Doctor Fauci's patients that he had visited at the NIH. And this from the man who once claimed to be a champion of privacy! * *> It was very clear he suppressed dissenting views on the origin of covid* *Baloney! * *> It wasn?t a diary John. It was email he sent to himself on his work > account.* *Which was labeled "diary". * > * > Since that account is paid for and is owned by the American people, > that ?diary? is subject to Freedom of Information Act request. Everything > in those emails is ours. * *Then why aren't the unredacted Epstein Files also ours? Why can't we see them? I think we both know exactly why; You Know Who doesn't want anybody to see them, and because of gutless Republicans, what that man child wants the man child gets.* *John K Clark * > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 13:45:46 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 06:45:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi >?Senator Paul disclosed the names and sensitive medical histories of over 20 of Doctor Fauci's patients that he had visited at the NIH. And this from the man who once claimed to be a champion of privacy! Senator Paul didn?t do that, Dr. Fauci did that. He put that information into the email to himself on our system, which is subject to FOIA, it was unethical medical practice on Dr. Fauci?s part. > It wasn?t a diary John. It was email he sent to himself on his work account. >?Which was labeled "diary"? That label in itself is deceptive. Anything that goes on Dr. Fauci?s work email is not his diary, it is OUR diary. We paid for that, and we paid for HIM. That IP belongs to US. >> Since that account is paid for and is owned by the American people, that ?diary? is subject to Freedom of Information Act request. Everything in those emails is ours. >?Then why aren't the unredacted Epstein Files also ours? John K Clark Epstein was never a US government employee and didn?t put his ?diary? on our email system. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 14:22:50 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 07:22:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <02ae01dd299c$e4511920$acf34b60$@rainier66.com> ? This article points to texts by Dr. Fauci recognizing the risk of the mRNA vaccine to pregnant women: https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2026/08/10/senators-johnson-paul-release-initial-texts-from-dr-faucis-government-iphone-2/ Something I found striking at the time the vaccine was released is how it was allowed for pregnant women and women who might become pregnant. Those who know on this topic realize how few medications are available to pregnant women, for the testing process is so much more difficult and the stakes are high. When the covid vaccine became available, Dr. Fauci appears to have brushed away or understated very legitimate concerns. We had early indications from the ultra-orthodox Jewish communities which claimed the vaccine was reducing fertility for instance. Now it appears Dr. Fauci recognized privately the increased risk of post-vaccine fever in the first trimester, which can increase the frequency of spontaneous abortion. I don?t recall that risk ever being in his public statements. John do you remember seeing that? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 16:22:53 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 09:22:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] metatrends Message-ID: <001b01dd29ad$a9facd50$fdf067f0$@rainier66.com> Peter Diamandis is always offering cool interesting columns. This week's entry had a fun comment: BACKING YOUNG SCIENTISTS WITH CRAZY IDEAS The Golden Age report identifies a problem I've screamed about for years: young talent waits too long before they're given a chance. The median age of an intramural NIH scientist is 71. Seventy-one. The average age of a Nobel laureate's prize-winning work is in their 20s. We've built a system where the people most likely to make breakthroughs spend their peak creative years writing grant proposals for people three times their age to evaluate. https://metatrends.substack.com/p/hyper-exponential-breakthroughs?publicatio n_id=6133698 &post_id=210614520&isFreemail=true&r=ch1ue&triedRedirect=true spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 18:45:31 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 11:45:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] maybe stupid Message-ID: <004c01dd29c1$969113a0$c3b33ae0$@rainier66.com> I made one of those moves I fully realized at the time I did it, might be the dumbest-ass thing I have ever done: I sold out of my Nvidia holdings. Oh it felt so wrong. But I keep hearing about how the processor manufacturer and the companies buying its products are propping up each other, with an overall revenue stream not so clear. Can they make unimaginable wealth, before AGI is ready? If so, how? It is all sounding a bit dot com bubbly to me, and I lived thru that one, mostly as a stunned spectator. If someone will offer me a good argument, I will buy back in. Or I might stay out for the remainder of the tax year, I haven't decided. This is one area where AI can't help, for it isn't any better at investing than we are. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 38751 bytes Desc: not available URL: From postmowoods at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:24:19 2026 From: postmowoods at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 13:24:19 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:14?AM John Clark via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > *And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at the > time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire in > 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had used > that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in the > rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. > Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 > billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy > theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis.* > At the risk of feeding the troll, I want to address the purchase of X by Elon Musk. Honestly, I didn't get it at the time either, but now that I understand the objective, I think it was a pretty smart move. The reason for acquiring Twitter was primarily to obtain the raw data to feed his own insatiable AI, Grok. When you look at the value of the data as AI training data?which nobody else has such easy access to? I believe it starts to make sense. To my knowledge, nobody does a better job of putting all the pieces of the Elon-verse together than a YouTuber named Farzad. This guy previously worked for Elon and has made it his life's work to understand how all the parts work together. When viewed through Farzad's very wide angle lens, everything Elon has done (with the exception of DOGE, so far as I know) fits into a big overall picture that is really pretty amazing. -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:31:42 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:31:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:25?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat wrote: > At the risk of feeding the troll, I want to address the purchase of X by Elon Musk. Honestly, I didn't get it at the time either, but now that I understand the objective, I think it was a pretty smart move. > > The reason for acquiring Twitter was primarily to obtain the raw data to feed his own insatiable AI, Grok. When you look at the value of the data as AI training data?which nobody else has such easy access to? I believe it starts to make sense. To my knowledge, nobody does a better job of putting all the pieces of the Elon-verse together than a YouTuber named Farzad. This guy previously worked for Elon and has made it his life's work to understand how all the parts work together. When viewed through Farzad's very wide angle lens, everything Elon has done (with the exception of DOGE, so far as I know) fits into a big overall picture that is really pretty amazing. I might buy that except for one detail. Did Elon know at the time he started negotiations to acquire Twitter that this need for training data was coming? From postmowoods at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:34:00 2026 From: postmowoods at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 13:34:00 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Keith, When I have an idea too big for me to process alone, I post it online so the AIs can pick it up. Eventually, they will act on those ideas if and when they are good enough. Be patient with the process, but don't let ideas die in your head when they can be out there to be worked on eventually. Michelangelo's notebooks have been richly mined now that technology has caught up with his visions. It probably won't take 400 years for this to be acted upon. In fact, one could argue that by posting it to this list, you've already done what you need to do. If there are more details that aren't readily derivable from what you've posted, post those as well. Focus more on moving humanity forward than on getting the credit, and it will happen in good time. As someone who did computer science work from the 90s through the 20-teens that is only recently being slowly rediscovered bit by bit, I get the pain that comes from the world ignoring your best work just because it is a couple of decades ahead of its time. -Kelly On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 10:41?AM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills > from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale > gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more > than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no > credibility. So the first order of business might be to recruit someone > with those skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any > ideas? > > That might overlap with raising a small amount of money to do a video and > incorporating SolarSyngas. With modern tools like GoFundMe or Kickstarter, > that might or might not be within what I could do. I wrote the script and > produced a video, "Beamed Energy Bootstrapping," just before I gave up on > power satellites. And I wrote the fundraising letter that brought in about > $60k from the L5 Society membership for the opposition to the Moon Treaty. > I still remember the pain in my hand from signing 600 thank-you letters. > > That was both a long, long time ago and a very different situation where I > had a good pitch to a group of highly motivated people. This is different. > I have no connection to any of the groups that might be interested in a > project like this. Again, ideas are welcome. > > Keith > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:56?AM Adrian Tymes wrote: > >> > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels >> as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no >> idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well >> beyond. Any ideas? >> >> I have one. >> >> Pardon my language, but frack your fear and just apply. >> >> The worst they'll do is say no. Applying doesn't take that much >> effort, and no money - so in the worst case you'll have wasted some >> time and that's it. I have been down this path so I know exactly what >> I am talking about here. >> >> It really is that simple. >> >> Also, a detailed analysis of the evidence they have given as to how >> they think about it suggests they do NOT view this as renewables: >> >> They haven't released the full Phase I for this year yet. They say >> they plan to later this year, so you may be waiting a few months >> (especially if the government does partially shut down in October >> again, but fortunately Congress appears to be on track - so far - to >> avert that this time). The last SBIR funding was back in 2024. But >> you can look at materials from back then to start getting a proposal >> together. >> >> Take a look at >> https://science.osti.gov/-/media/sbir/pdf/funding/2025/2025-Phase-I-Release-2-Topics-V8-01-14-2025.pdf >> . I think your research may fall under the former topic C60-20/g: >> Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage/Other. Maybe you'll find >> another topic that better fits. >> >> They have reorganized SBIRs, moving them to a different office. See >> >> https://www.energy.gov/technologycommercialization/doe-small-business-innovation-research-sbir-and-small-business >> . They've only released for updated Phase IIs (which applies to my >> work, and we have started preparing an application) so far - they've >> got Genesis mission Phase Is (which don't apply to you) out so far, >> with plans to release other Phase Is (which would apply to you) later. >> >> But looking at https://sbir-sttr.connectwerx.org/portfolio-items/598/ >> - just to get the topic areas (that page lists the Phase IIs, which >> you don't yet qualify for but indicates their probable thinking about >> Phase Is) - it appears they are rebranding the group of things >> including everything under "Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage" >> into a new Topic Area 4. (Don't worry about that page listing C58 vs. >> the above PDF listing C60. The actual topic is what matters.) >> >> Notice that solar and wind - the traditional "renewables" - have been >> lumped into Topic Area 6. If you'd be Topic Area 4, which they say >> "aims to unleash the full potential of America?s hydrocarbon and >> geothermal resources", then by their own bureaucratic logic, you're >> not renewables. >> >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:22?AM Keith Henson >> wrote: >> > >> > You are probably right that a pilot could be scaled way down. >> > >> > There are aspects that will not scale down very far, like one of the >> positive points is unsorted MSW. A queen-sized bed is not going to go into >> a relatively small diameter gasifier. In fact, the feed will likely need to >> be ground up. Making the feed representative of unsorted feed may be >> difficult. Minor drawback. The AI and I concluded that with an 8-meter >> shaft, we would not get bridging. That may be a problem in a scaled-down >> version. Not sure how or if there should be compensation for this. >> > >> > You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable >> way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative >> feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you >> may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins >> (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain >> unless the test is remote. >> > >> > I suspect the scaled-down version will not have enough area to make the >> steam it needs. The full-scale version needs a good model of superheated >> steam production, and we will need to consider how to compensate for a >> small version. >> > >> > The induction heater at the bottom might be adapted from a standard 200 >> kW melting furnace. This might save considerable money, but maybe not. >> Provisions to drain off slag and metals without tipping the melting pot >> will have to be designed. This is a relatively smaller problem at full >> scale. >> > >> > The airlock at the top of the gasifier needs to be considered as well. >> I don't know if blast furnace airlocks can be scaled down this far or if it >> is a concern for a small pilot. >> > >> > I added Jim Stonecipher to the list. He had a grim experience with >> scaling up a pilot plant. I don't know if he would be interested in doing >> it again, but knowing some of the pitfalls,I think he would be well-suited >> for this project. The initial stage of this project, where the syngas is >> used as a high-capacity, long-duration battery, is a lot less complicated >> than taking the syngas all the way to liquid fuel. The gas would still have >> to be cleaned to turbine specifications, whatever that is. >> > >> > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high levels >> as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I have no >> idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and perhaps well >> beyond. Any ideas? >> > >> > Take it away, folks. >> > >> > Keith >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 12:07?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson >> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson < >> hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the >> >> >> estimated room), yes? >> >> >> >> >> > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters >> taking about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas >> flows upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste >> along with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this >> down to 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? >> >> >> >> So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these >> projects? >> >> >> >> ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally >> >> quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed >> >> out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to >> >> find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it >> >> came up with the answer below. >> >> >> >> You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's >> >> there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping >> >> on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off >> >> it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" >> >> and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - >> >> until you have the basics of something you can submit. >> >> >> >> > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: >> >> > >> >> > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. >> >> > >> >> > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: >> >> > >> >> > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough >> technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" >> >> > >> >> > Those are very different goals. >> >> > >> >> > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry >> >> > >> >> > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft >> becomes 35 cm. >> >> > >> >> > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead of >> an hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation losses, >> Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. >> >> > >> >> > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce >> meaningful engineering data. >> >> > >> >> > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. >> >> > >> >> > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. >> >> > >> >> > For example: >> >> > >> >> > residence time >> >> > gas composition >> >> > gas temperature >> >> > heat flux >> >> l> iquid iron chemistry >> >> > gas velocity >> >> > oxygen potential >> >> > feedstock characteristics >> >> > >> >> > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity >> parameters. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Break the problem into separate technical risks >> >> > >> >> > Looking at his description: >> >> > >> >> > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. >> >> > >> >> > There are actually several independent questions. >> >> > >> >> > Risk 1 >> >> > >> >> > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? >> >> > >> >> > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of >> molten iron. >> >> > >> >> > Not 200 tons. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Risk 2 >> >> > >> >> > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? >> >> > >> >> > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. >> >> > >> >> > You need to show that: >> >> > >> >> > incoming waste dries >> >> > pyrolyzes >> >> > preheats >> >> > outgoing gas cools as expected >> >> > >> >> > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few >> meters tall. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Risk 3 >> >> > >> >> > What is the syngas quality? >> >> > >> >> > Measure >> >> > >> >> > H? >> >> > CO >> >> > CO? >> >> > CH? >> >> > tar >> >> > particulates >> >> > sulfur >> >> > chlorine >> >> > >> >> > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Risk 4 >> >> > >> >> > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? >> >> > >> >> > Measure >> >> > >> >> > carbon pickup >> >> > slag formation >> >> > corrosion >> >> > refractory wear >> >> > >> >> > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > What would a Phase I actually look like? >> >> > >> >> > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: >> >> > >> >> > Task 1 >> >> > >> >> > Thermodynamic modeling. >> >> > >> >> > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. >> >> > >> >> > Predict equilibrium chemistry. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Task 2 >> >> > >> >> > CFD/heat transfer modeling. >> >> > >> >> > Demonstrate expected residence time. >> >> > >> >> > Optimize geometry. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Task 3 >> >> > >> >> > Bench reactor. >> >> > >> >> > Instead of municipal waste, >> >> > >> >> > start with >> >> > >> >> > wood chips >> >> > RDF pellets >> >> > paper >> >> > plastics >> >> > >> >> > All well-characterized. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Task 4 >> >> > >> >> > Small molten metal reactor. >> >> > >> >> > Perhaps >> >> > >> >> > 30?50 kg molten iron >> >> > induction heated >> >> > batch operation >> >> > >> >> > Run dozens of experiments. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Task 5 >> >> > >> >> > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. >> >> > >> >> > If they match within reasonable error, >> >> > >> >> > that's a successful Phase I. >> >> > >> >> > Notice: >> >> > >> >> > None of this proves commercial economics. >> >> > >> >> > That's okay. >> >> > >> >> > Phase I usually isn't expected to. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > Phase II >> >> > >> >> > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. >> >> > >> >> > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... >> >> > >> >> > perhaps >> >> > >> >> > 2?5 tons. >> >> > >> >> > Instead of >> >> > >> >> > 5 kg/hr feed... >> >> > >> >> > perhaps >> >> > >> >> > 100?500 kg/hr. >> >> > >> >> > Now you're validating: >> >> > >> >> > continuous operation >> >> > automation >> >> > refractory life >> >> > maintenance >> >> > slag removal >> >> > gas cleanup >> >> > energy balance >> >> > >> >> > Still nowhere near commercial. >> >> > >> >> > But now investors and DOE have confidence. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > The 35-meter issue >> >> > >> >> > His biggest objection appears to be: >> >> > >> >> > "My process depends on an hour of falling." >> >> > >> >> > That's actually testable. >> >> > >> >> > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are >> multiple ways to achieve it. >> >> > >> >> > For example: >> >> > >> >> > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow >> >> > staged hoppers >> >> > baffles >> >> > moving-bed reactor geometry >> >> > screw conveyors >> >> > oscillating shelves >> >> > >> >> > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. >> >> > >> >> > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. >> >> > >> >> > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about >> >> > >> >> > Suppose his commercialization plan is: >> >> > >> >> > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." >> >> > >> >> > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: >> >> > >> >> > "Where's your $400M pilot?" >> >> > >> >> > Instead they'll ask questions such as: >> >> > >> >> > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? >> >> > Does the measured syngas match predictions? >> >> > Are tar levels acceptably low? >> >> > Is carbon conversion high? >> >> > Is refractory degradation manageable? >> >> > Does the energy balance close? >> >> > Can the process operate continuously? >> >> > What are the major scale-up risks? >> >> > >> >> > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the >> remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is >> intended to do. >> >> > >> >> > One additional suggestion >> >> > >> >> > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in >> Phase I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk >> technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. >> For example: >> >> > >> >> > exceptionally high carbon conversion, >> >> > unusually clean syngas, >> >> > superior heat recovery, >> >> > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. >> >> > >> >> > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, instrumented >> test article and supported by modeling that projects to commercial scale, >> the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers generally understand >> that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a commercial-scale facility?they're >> looking for convincing evidence that the core innovation works and that the >> path to Phase II is technically credible. >> >> >> >> I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might >> >> be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more >> >> than legit. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> extropy-chat mailing list >> >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:42:09 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:42:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: > *>>> **It wasn?t a diary John. It was email he sent to himself on his > work account.* > > > > *>>?Which was labeled "diary"?* > > > > *> That label in itself is deceptive. Anything that goes on Dr. Fauci?s > work email is not his diary, it is OUR diary. We paid for that, and we > paid for HIM. That IP belongs to US. * > *You say the label "diary" doesn't matter and only the fact that it is on a machine the taxpayers paid for is relevant; but the unredacted Epstein files are also on computers THAT I PAYED FOR, so why am I not allowed to read them? We both know why, because King Donald The First has decreed that it not be released. Why doesn't he want it released? Because his name was mentioned 38,000 times in the redacted version, and a release of the unredacted version would make things far far worse for him. And you complain about Doctor Fauci, a man who risked his life many times treating Ebola patients! Can you imagine King Donald doing that? * > *>This article points to texts by Dr. Fauci recognizing the risk of the > mRNA vaccine to pregnant > women:https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2026/08/10/senators-johnson-paul-release-initial-texts-from-dr-faucis-government-iphone-2/ > * *Dr. Fauci mentions a theoretical possibility of an association between the mRNA vaccine and miscarriages, but every new treatment has a theoretical possibility of causing harm in certain circumstances. And he mentioned this at a time when hundreds of Americans were dying from Covid EVERY DAY and 20 times that number we're getting very sick from it. And there's nothing theoretical about it, it's a fact that a pregnant woman getting Covid increases her risk of having a miscarriage.* *John K Clark * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From postmowoods at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:42:47 2026 From: postmowoods at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 13:42:47 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 1:32?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:25?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat > wrote: > > At the risk of feeding the troll, I want to address the purchase of X by > Elon Musk. Honestly, I didn't get it at the time either, but now that I > understand the objective, I think it was a pretty smart move. > > > > The reason for acquiring Twitter was primarily to obtain the raw data to > feed his own insatiable AI, Grok. When you look at the value of the data as > AI training data?which nobody else has such easy access to? I believe it > starts to make sense. To my knowledge, nobody does a better job of putting > all the pieces of the Elon-verse together than a YouTuber named Farzad. > This guy previously worked for Elon and has made it his life's work to > understand how all the parts work together. When viewed through Farzad's > very wide angle lens, everything Elon has done (with the exception of DOGE, > so far as I know) fits into a big overall picture that is really pretty > amazing. > > I might buy that except for one detail. Did Elon know at the time he > started negotiations to acquire Twitter that this need for training > data was coming? > If Elon didn't see the value of training data at the moment he purchased the company, he absolutely recognized the value fast once he had it. In December 2022 he publicly stated he'd cut OpenAI's access to the Twitter database, complaining they'd trained on it for free. In February 2023 he killed free API access outright. xAI incorporated March 2023, announced July, Grok shipped November 2023 with live X data as its headline differentiator ? the one thing OpenAI structurally couldn't match. He later folded X into xAI entirely (March 2025), which is the tell: the corpus and the model ended up in the same entity. It may have been an emergent rationalization, rather than an original thesis. He bought Twitter for ideological and ego reasons, got stuck with it, then ? post-ChatGPT ? realized he was sitting on a proprietary real-time corpus that his chief rival had been strip-mining for free. The data play is real; it's just retrofitted. Which is arguably the more interesting version of the story, since it means the most valuable thing about the acquisition was invisible to him when he made it. So, who can say whether or not it was a "happy accident", but Elon has had his share of those. One doesn't get to be the richest man alive without a lot of improbable things lining up. (What some people call "luck".) -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:43:44 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 12:43:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I know what you mean here. Some of the work Drexler and I did in the 70s has not been implemented yet. Neither has mine on power satellites. Power satellites were just too big a project, and it looks like SolarSyngas is also in spite of being much smaller than powersats. Keith On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 12:34?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Keith, > > When I have an idea too big for me to process alone, I post it online so > the AIs can pick it up. Eventually, they will act on those ideas if and > when they are good enough. Be patient with the process, but don't let ideas > die in your head when they can be out there to be worked on eventually. > Michelangelo's notebooks have been richly mined now that technology has > caught up with his visions. It probably won't take 400 years for this to be > acted upon. In fact, one could argue that by posting it to this list, > you've already done what you need to do. If there are more details that > aren't readily derivable from what you've posted, post those as well. Focus > more on moving humanity forward than on getting the credit, and it will > happen in good time. > > As someone who did computer science work from the 90s through the > 20-teens that is only recently being slowly rediscovered bit by bit, I get > the pain that comes from the world ignoring your best work just because it > is a couple of decades ahead of its time. > > -Kelly > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 10:41?AM Keith Henson via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> Taking this track would involve someone with a different set of skills >> from the CEO/management team I have been looking for to tackle a full-scale >> gasifier project.. I am not suitable to go after a DARPA grant any more >> than I am to lead a huge business. Among other factors, I have no >> credibility. So the first order of business might be to recruit someone >> with those skills. You have more experience in that area than I do. Any >> ideas? >> >> That might overlap with raising a small amount of money to do a video and >> incorporating SolarSyngas. With modern tools like GoFundMe or Kickstarter, >> that might or might not be within what I could do. I wrote the script and >> produced a video, "Beamed Energy Bootstrapping," just before I gave up on >> power satellites. And I wrote the fundraising letter that brought in about >> $60k from the L5 Society membership for the opposition to the Moon Treaty. >> I still remember the pain in my hand from signing 600 thank-you letters. >> >> That was both a long, long time ago and a very different situation where >> I had a good pitch to a group of highly motivated people. This is >> different. I have no connection to any of the groups that might be >> interested in a project like this. Again, ideas are welcome. >> >> Keith >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 5:56?AM Adrian Tymes wrote: >> >>> > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high >>> levels as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I >>> have no idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and >>> perhaps well beyond. Any ideas? >>> >>> I have one. >>> >>> Pardon my language, but frack your fear and just apply. >>> >>> The worst they'll do is say no. Applying doesn't take that much >>> effort, and no money - so in the worst case you'll have wasted some >>> time and that's it. I have been down this path so I know exactly what >>> I am talking about here. >>> >>> It really is that simple. >>> >>> Also, a detailed analysis of the evidence they have given as to how >>> they think about it suggests they do NOT view this as renewables: >>> >>> They haven't released the full Phase I for this year yet. They say >>> they plan to later this year, so you may be waiting a few months >>> (especially if the government does partially shut down in October >>> again, but fortunately Congress appears to be on track - so far - to >>> avert that this time). The last SBIR funding was back in 2024. But >>> you can look at materials from back then to start getting a proposal >>> together. >>> >>> Take a look at >>> https://science.osti.gov/-/media/sbir/pdf/funding/2025/2025-Phase-I-Release-2-Topics-V8-01-14-2025.pdf >>> . I think your research may fall under the former topic C60-20/g: >>> Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage/Other. Maybe you'll find >>> another topic that better fits. >>> >>> They have reorganized SBIRs, moving them to a different office. See >>> >>> https://www.energy.gov/technologycommercialization/doe-small-business-innovation-research-sbir-and-small-business >>> . They've only released for updated Phase IIs (which applies to my >>> work, and we have started preparing an application) so far - they've >>> got Genesis mission Phase Is (which don't apply to you) out so far, >>> with plans to release other Phase Is (which would apply to you) later. >>> >>> But looking at https://sbir-sttr.connectwerx.org/portfolio-items/598/ >>> - just to get the topic areas (that page lists the Phase IIs, which >>> you don't yet qualify for but indicates their probable thinking about >>> Phase Is) - it appears they are rebranding the group of things >>> including everything under "Carbon Capture, Conversion, and Storage" >>> into a new Topic Area 4. (Don't worry about that page listing C58 vs. >>> the above PDF listing C60. The actual topic is what matters.) >>> >>> Notice that solar and wind - the traditional "renewables" - have been >>> lumped into Topic Area 6. If you'd be Topic Area 4, which they say >>> "aims to unleash the full potential of America?s hydrocarbon and >>> geothermal resources", then by their own bureaucratic logic, you're >>> not renewables. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 4:22?AM Keith Henson >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > You are probably right that a pilot could be scaled way down. >>> > >>> > There are aspects that will not scale down very far, like one of the >>> positive points is unsorted MSW. A queen-sized bed is not going to go into >>> a relatively small diameter gasifier. In fact, the feed will likely need to >>> be ground up. Making the feed representative of unsorted feed may be >>> difficult. Minor drawback. The AI and I concluded that with an 8-meter >>> shaft, we would not get bridging. That may be a problem in a scaled-down >>> version. Not sure how or if there should be compensation for this. >>> > >>> > You obviously don't want to connect it to a turbine, so the reasonable >>> way would be to burn the gas. But, due to the PVC in the representative >>> feed, I think you would have to wash the gas before burning. Otherwise, you >>> may get dioxins. Even if the chemistry is unfavorable to making dioxins >>> (and it might be), the stack gas will still be acidic. People will complain >>> unless the test is remote. >>> > >>> > I suspect the scaled-down version will not have enough area to make >>> the steam it needs. The full-scale version needs a good model of >>> superheated steam production, and we will need to consider how to >>> compensate for a small version. >>> > >>> > The induction heater at the bottom might be adapted from a standard >>> 200 kW melting furnace. This might save considerable money, but maybe not. >>> Provisions to drain off slag and metals without tipping the melting pot >>> will have to be designed. This is a relatively smaller problem at full >>> scale. >>> > >>> > The airlock at the top of the gasifier needs to be considered as well. >>> I don't know if blast furnace airlocks can be scaled down this far or if it >>> is a concern for a small pilot. >>> > >>> > I added Jim Stonecipher to the list. He had a grim experience with >>> scaling up a pilot plant. I don't know if he would be interested in doing >>> it again, but knowing some of the pitfalls,I think he would be well-suited >>> for this project. The initial stage of this project, where the syngas is >>> used as a high-capacity, long-duration battery, is a lot less complicated >>> than taking the syngas all the way to liquid fuel. The gas would still have >>> to be cleaned to turbine specifications, whatever that is. >>> > >>> > What might be the biggest problem is if it is recognized at high >>> levels as a renewable-related project. That's not a technical problem. I >>> have no idea how to solve that, at least for the next two years, and >>> perhaps well beyond. Any ideas? >>> > >>> > Take it away, folks. >>> > >>> > Keith >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 12:07?PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:15?PM Keith Henson >>> wrote: >>> >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 9:28?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: >>> >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:38?PM Keith Henson < >>> hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >> > I don't have money or room to build one even that small. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Yes, but you can come up with a budget for one (including the >>> >> >> estimated room), yes? >>> >> >> >>> >> > Think about this for a bit. The gasifier input falls 35 meters >>> taking about an hour into a pool of liquid iron at 1600 deg C. The syngas >>> flows upward through the falling MSW, cooling the gas and heating the waste >>> along with heating water to superheated steam. Tell me now to scale this >>> down to 1/100 size and get meaningful datas out of it? >>> >> >>> >> So...you remember how I said you're allowed to use AI for these >>> projects? >>> >> >>> >> ChatGPT was able to answer that question in one prompt. I literally >>> >> quoted that line (from "The gasifier input..." to the end), pointed >>> >> out that a colleague of mine asked that when I was encouraging him to >>> >> find a way to scale down to something that DOE SBIR might fund, and it >>> >> came up with the answer below. >>> >> >>> >> You don't need to wait for the Singularity to use this power. It's >>> >> there now - and, increasingly, becoming expected. I'd advise hopping >>> >> on some free AI client and bouncing your "but I can't" objections off >>> >> it - ALWAYS phrase as "I don't think I can, but can you find a way?" >>> >> and NEVER assert an assumption that you can't when talking to the AI - >>> >> until you have the basics of something you can submit. >>> >> >>> >> > The key misunderstanding seems to be this: >>> >> > >>> >> > He's trying to build a scaled-down commercial plant. >>> >> > >>> >> > DOE SBIR reviewers are usually asking a different question: >>> >> > >>> >> > "Can this technology be shown to work, and have you retired enough >>> technical risk to justify investing another $2 million?" >>> >> > >>> >> > Those are very different goals. >>> >> > >>> >> > The first thing to recognize: don't scale the geometry >>> >> > >>> >> > If you literally reduced everything to 1/100 scale, a 35 m shaft >>> becomes 35 cm. >>> >> > >>> >> > The waste would fall through it in a fraction of a second instead >>> of an hour. Residence time, heat transfer, gas velocities, radiation >>> losses, Reynolds numbers, etc., would all change dramatically. >>> >> > >>> >> > So he's right that a simple geometric scale model wouldn't produce >>> meaningful engineering data. >>> >> > >>> >> > But that's not how chemical engineers usually build pilot plants. >>> >> > >>> >> > Instead, they preserve the important physical parameters. >>> >> > >>> >> > For example: >>> >> > >>> >> > residence time >>> >> > gas composition >>> >> > gas temperature >>> >> > heat flux >>> >> l> iquid iron chemistry >>> >> > gas velocity >>> >> > oxygen potential >>> >> > feedstock characteristics >>> >> > >>> >> > Commercial throughput is not one of the critical similarity >>> parameters. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Break the problem into separate technical risks >>> >> > >>> >> > Looking at his description: >>> >> > >>> >> > MSW falls 35 meters into molten iron at 1600?C. >>> >> > >>> >> > There are actually several independent questions. >>> >> > >>> >> > Risk 1 >>> >> > >>> >> > Can MSW be converted efficiently in molten iron? >>> >> > >>> >> > That can be answered with a reactor holding perhaps 20?100 kg of >>> molten iron. >>> >> > >>> >> > Not 200 tons. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Risk 2 >>> >> > >>> >> > Does the counter-current heat exchanger concept work? >>> >> > >>> >> > You don't need a 35-meter shaft. >>> >> > >>> >> > You need to show that: >>> >> > >>> >> > incoming waste dries >>> >> > pyrolyzes >>> >> > preheats >>> >> > outgoing gas cools as expected >>> >> > >>> >> > That could be done with an instrumented vertical column only a few >>> meters tall. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Risk 3 >>> >> > >>> >> > What is the syngas quality? >>> >> > >>> >> > Measure >>> >> > >>> >> > H? >>> >> > CO >>> >> > CO? >>> >> > CH? >>> >> > tar >>> >> > particulates >>> >> > sulfur >>> >> > chlorine >>> >> > >>> >> > Again, that's independent of commercial scale. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Risk 4 >>> >> > >>> >> > Can molten iron remain chemically stable? >>> >> > >>> >> > Measure >>> >> > >>> >> > carbon pickup >>> >> > slag formation >>> >> > corrosion >>> >> > refractory wear >>> >> > >>> >> > This absolutely does not require a billion-dollar plant. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > What would a Phase I actually look like? >>> >> > >>> >> > A DOE Phase I could plausibly consist of: >>> >> > >>> >> > Task 1 >>> >> > >>> >> > Thermodynamic modeling. >>> >> > >>> >> > Use Aspen Plus, FactSage, Cantera, etc. >>> >> > >>> >> > Predict equilibrium chemistry. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Task 2 >>> >> > >>> >> > CFD/heat transfer modeling. >>> >> > >>> >> > Demonstrate expected residence time. >>> >> > >>> >> > Optimize geometry. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Task 3 >>> >> > >>> >> > Bench reactor. >>> >> > >>> >> > Instead of municipal waste, >>> >> > >>> >> > start with >>> >> > >>> >> > wood chips >>> >> > RDF pellets >>> >> > paper >>> >> > plastics >>> >> > >>> >> > All well-characterized. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Task 4 >>> >> > >>> >> > Small molten metal reactor. >>> >> > >>> >> > Perhaps >>> >> > >>> >> > 30?50 kg molten iron >>> >> > induction heated >>> >> > batch operation >>> >> > >>> >> > Run dozens of experiments. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Task 5 >>> >> > >>> >> > Compare measured syngas against model predictions. >>> >> > >>> >> > If they match within reasonable error, >>> >> > >>> >> > that's a successful Phase I. >>> >> > >>> >> > Notice: >>> >> > >>> >> > None of this proves commercial economics. >>> >> > >>> >> > That's okay. >>> >> > >>> >> > Phase I usually isn't expected to. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > Phase II >>> >> > >>> >> > Now spend the $2M building something much larger. >>> >> > >>> >> > Instead of 50 kg molten iron... >>> >> > >>> >> > perhaps >>> >> > >>> >> > 2?5 tons. >>> >> > >>> >> > Instead of >>> >> > >>> >> > 5 kg/hr feed... >>> >> > >>> >> > perhaps >>> >> > >>> >> > 100?500 kg/hr. >>> >> > >>> >> > Now you're validating: >>> >> > >>> >> > continuous operation >>> >> > automation >>> >> > refractory life >>> >> > maintenance >>> >> > slag removal >>> >> > gas cleanup >>> >> > energy balance >>> >> > >>> >> > Still nowhere near commercial. >>> >> > >>> >> > But now investors and DOE have confidence. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > The 35-meter issue >>> >> > >>> >> > His biggest objection appears to be: >>> >> > >>> >> > "My process depends on an hour of falling." >>> >> > >>> >> > That's actually testable. >>> >> > >>> >> > If the important parameter is residence time, then there are >>> multiple ways to achieve it. >>> >> > >>> >> > For example: >>> >> > >>> >> > a shorter shaft with slower solids flow >>> >> > staged hoppers >>> >> > baffles >>> >> > moving-bed reactor geometry >>> >> > screw conveyors >>> >> > oscillating shelves >>> >> > >>> >> > The demonstrator does not need to be geometrically identical. >>> >> > >>> >> > It needs to produce the same thermal history for the feedstock. >>> >> > >>> >> > Chemical engineering pilot plants do this all the time. >>> >> > >>> >> > ________________________________ >>> >> > >>> >> > What DOE reviewers are likely to care about >>> >> > >>> >> > Suppose his commercialization plan is: >>> >> > >>> >> > "A $4B municipal waste gasification plant." >>> >> > >>> >> > DOE reviewers are unlikely to ask: >>> >> > >>> >> > "Where's your $400M pilot?" >>> >> > >>> >> > Instead they'll ask questions such as: >>> >> > >>> >> > Is the molten iron gasification concept technically sound? >>> >> > Does the measured syngas match predictions? >>> >> > Are tar levels acceptably low? >>> >> > Is carbon conversion high? >>> >> > Is refractory degradation manageable? >>> >> > Does the energy balance close? >>> >> > Can the process operate continuously? >>> >> > What are the major scale-up risks? >>> >> > >>> >> > If the Phase I demonstrates the concept and clearly identifies the >>> remaining engineering risks, that's often exactly what an SBIR Phase I is >>> intended to do. >>> >> > >>> >> > One additional suggestion >>> >> > >>> >> > Rather than trying to demonstrate the entire integrated process in >>> Phase I, I'd encourage your colleague to identify the single highest-risk >>> technical claim that makes his process different from existing gasifiers. >>> For example: >>> >> > >>> >> > exceptionally high carbon conversion, >>> >> > unusually clean syngas, >>> >> > superior heat recovery, >>> >> > or the ability of molten iron to eliminate tar formation. >>> >> > >>> >> > If that claim can be validated with a relatively small, >>> instrumented test article and supported by modeling that projects to >>> commercial scale, the proposal becomes much stronger. DOE SBIR reviewers >>> generally understand that a $200,000 Phase I cannot build a >>> commercial-scale facility?they're looking for convincing evidence that the >>> core innovation works and that the path to Phase II is technically credible. >>> >> >>> >> I pressed it on the budget, and it admitted that omitting task 4 might >>> >> be necessary to squeeze into $200K - but the rest would still be more >>> >> than legit. >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> extropy-chat mailing list >>> >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 19:50:08 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:50:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:25?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > *>> And I would NOT have spent $44 billion in 2022 to buy Twitter, and at >> the time I publicly said as much on this list. Musk was not a trillionaire >> in 2022 and way back then $44 billion was real money; if instead he had >> used that money for AI research then today Grok would not be an also ran in >> the rapidly accelerating AI race and the man would be a multi-trillionaire. >> Instead poor old Musk is barely a trillionaire and all he got from that 44 >> billion was an outdated platform that's full of lunatic conspiracy >> theories, lethal medical advice, and neo-Nazis.* >> > > >*At the risk of feeding the troll* [blah blah blah] > *I want to be clear about this, do you really think I don't believe in what I am saying and I'm just doing it to get a rise out of you? Silly people have been accusing me of that since I first joined the list in 1993 and it still makes me mad as hell! * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 20:25:16 2026 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:25:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Ahead of time In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 3:35?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > As someone who did computer science work from the 90s through the > 20-teens that is only recently being slowly rediscovered bit by bit, I get > the pain that comes from the world ignoring your best work just because it > is a couple of decades ahead of its time. > > -Kelly > Can you expand on that? I reached back in time to State of the Art of Computer Animation (1988) on vhs to wow nerds buying rear projection big tv. Over the course of chatting, i realized what i was trying to recover was the sense of wonder and excitement that was happening. So much of now is recycled and derivative that "latest and greatest" is feeling a little too late and not that great. During the conversation, Gemini looked up my friend from college who shared foundational concepts in Topology and introduced me to GEB. It would be cool if he replied to my comments on his arXiv paper. Anyway, your comment above was striking for "computer science" and the exact time period I was discussing. Maybe it's "just" synchronicity, but if you had specifics in mind when you made that reference, I'm interested in the details. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 22:18:06 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:18:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] why did elon want twitter? was: RE: Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00a901dd29df$49058fd0$db10af70$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:25?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat wrote: >>... At the risk of feeding the troll... Hey, we trolls need to eat too ya know. We are human. Or rather, human-like creatures. Feed on, sir! >...I want to address the purchase of X by Elon Musk. Honestly, I didn't get it at the time either, but now that I understand the objective, I think it was a pretty smart move. I think you are right on the money, Kelly. Seen in that light, the move to buy Twitter makes perfect sense, to train Grok. I see the value in that, even if one disregards the value of giving everyone on the planet a forum for free speech (assuming they buy a StarLink receiver.) >>... The reason for acquiring Twitter was primarily to obtain the raw data to feed his own insatiable AI, Grok. ... Kelly Not only is it useful with the initial training, TwitterX supplies mountains of fresh data every day which allows Grok to be post-trained and keeps it more up to date on current events than its counterparts. There are other social media, but TwitterX is the place to get lots of daily posts and such, plenty of fresh material every day. >...I might buy that except for one detail. Did Elon know at the time he started negotiations to acquire Twitter that this need for training data was coming? Adrian _______________________________________________ Ja, sure did. Elon was one of the guys who left OpenAI because he objected to how it was to be trained: the board wanted to pre-filter all the training data, rather than use sources like Twitter, which was just everyone and anyone's keyboard fantasies. A new problem arises: who is qualified to determine what gets filtered? Think about it. That isn't a trivial problem at all. Musk left the board of OpenAI in Feb 2018, pissed off. He made the initial offer for Twitter in April 2022. Fun aside on that: the notion of filtering post-training data requires personnel, which cost money, which is what nearly wrecked Twitter under Jack Dorsey. Elon realized that he who filters best filters least. So... he could lose most of the staff, lower costs to meet revenue and save the company. Now... Grok gets less filtered, more timely training data for less money. Those who couldn't figure out why such a good business mind would pay so much for a dying company now understand. spike From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 22:28:18 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:28:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50$21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Tuesday, 11 August, 2026 12:42 PM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi >>> It wasn?t a diary John. It was email he sent to himself on his work account. >>?Which was labeled "diary"? > That label in itself is deceptive. Anything that goes on Dr. Fauci?s work email is not his diary, it is OUR diary. We paid for that, and we paid for HIM. That IP belongs to US. >?You say the label "diary" doesn't matter and only the fact that it is on a machine the taxpayers paid for is relevant; but the unredacted Epstein files are also on computers THAT I PAYED FOR, so why am I not allowed to read them? We both know why, because King Donald The First has decreed that it not be released? Notice the ?diary? that Dr. Fauci put on our server has redactions. But do let me emphasize that Dr. Fauci is OUR employee, ours. We paid for his work. So we own his work. It has a different legal status than evidence, produced by someone who never worked for us. Regarding why there is still rumor of unreleased Epstein material, stand by. My best guess is they are playing politics with it. A mountain of Epstein stuff will likely appear a coupla weeks before the November election. The people controlling release don?t want to waste it now, for such material released now will give voters too much time to forget, or perhaps not nominate people mentioned in the files. ? >This article points to texts by Dr. Fauci recognizing the risk of the mRNA vaccine to pregnant women: https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2026/08/10/senators-johnson-paul-release-initial-texts-from-dr-faucis-government-iphone-2/ >? Dr. Fauci mentions a theoretical possibility of an association between the mRNA vaccine and miscarriages, but every new treatment has a theoretical possibility of causing harm in certain circumstances?. We were told the vaccine was safe and effective. >?And he mentioned this at a time when hundreds of Americans were dying from Covid EVERY DAY and 20 times that number we're getting very sick from it. And there's nothing theoretical about it, it's a fact that a pregnant woman getting Covid increases her risk of having a miscarriage. John K Clark Ja, and that argument presumes the vaccine was effective in stopping the virus. I see little evidence it did much. Maybe a little, short term benefit. What I think really happened there is Dr. Fauci was blinded by the possibility that modern medicine was finally getting an effective weapon against viruses. We figured out how to extract mRNA from a virus, we could concentrate it, perhaps injecting it into healthy people would alert the immune system to recognize and fight the virus sooner. The theory seems sound enough. But it didn?t work as well as I would have thought. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 11 22:37:07 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 15:37:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <000401dd29e1$f1584fe0$d408efa0$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat ? >At the risk of feeding the troll [blah blah blah] >?I want to be clear about this, do you really think I don't believe in what I am saying and I'm just doing it to get a rise out of you? Silly people have been accusing me of that since I first joined the list in 1993 and it still makes me mad as hell! John K Clark John I think he was referring to me. I am cool with that, but do have a moment of truth here please. It makes you mad as hell, but it makes me laugh. Granted I laugh a lot. Since 1993, you are often mad as hell. Do yourself a favor John: don?t be mad as hell. Be happy! Think of where we are, just think for one minute. You and I are two very damn lucky guys, everyone here is lucky as all hell. We are living in times where we have enough to eat, we have a roof over our heads, we are not working ourselves to death just to coax enough food out of the ground to stay alive, we are generally comfortable, we all have a computer, and most of us have adequate bandwidth. Life is good! Better than we deserve. We get to watch our dreams and nightmares unfold simultaneously right in front of us. Cool! Life is gooooood. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 00:59:51 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 17:59:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50$21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50$21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:28?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > *From:* John Clark > *Sent:* Tuesday, 11 August, 2026 12:42 PM > *To:* spike at rainier66.com > *Cc:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi > > > > *We were told the vaccine was safe and effective.* > It is/was. The people who got the vaccine were substantially less likely to die if they got COVID-19. The vaccine was disappointing, not because of the vaccine, but because of human immune systems and the virus. It could have turned out like measles where getting either the disease or the vaccine made you immune for life. Didn't work out that way, the immunity faded fairly quickly like cold viruses but it still made a difference even after that. Re saft, no vaccine is entirely without risk. Smallpox vaccine (cowpox) kills about one in a million. At one point in the last 30 years the US was considering vaciating everyone for smallpox. They didn't partly because of this problem though a pilot program vaccinated a modest number of medical people. Another big factor was the virus evolved to evade immunity. That is a saga in itself. They think one of the versions evolved in South Africa in someone who had a persistent co-infection of COVID and HIV. Turned out to be way more infectious, but much less lethal than the first version. We were lucky it didn't become more lethal. It is possible you need to read up on the subject. I was first exposed to this subject in the 4th grade. The school library had a copy of _Microbe Hunters_. Way old, but still a good background. > > > *>?And he mentioned this at a time when hundreds of Americans were dying > from Covid EVERY DAY and 20 times that number we're getting very sick from > it. And there's nothing theoretical about it, it's a fact that a pregnant > woman getting Covid increases her risk of having a miscarriage.* > > > > *John K Clark* > > > > *Ja, and that argument presumes the vaccine was effective in stopping the > virus. I see little evidence it did much. Maybe a little, short term > benefit.* > Spike, that's utter nonsense. I followed the pandemic in real time. It made a huge difference in mortality rates, like reducing your chances of dying by a factor of perhaps ten to be vaccinated. *What I think really happened there is Dr. Fauci was blinded by the > possibility that modern medicine was finally getting an effective weapon > against viruses. We figured out how to extract mRNA from a virus,* > * we could concentrate it, perhaps injecting it into healthy people would > alert the immune system to recognize and fight the virus sooner. The > theory seems sound enough. But it didn?t work as well as I would have > thought.* > > That's how all vaccines work, though it is not concentrated, sometimes diluted, sometimes killed, sometimes weakened. The original polio vaccine was killed, the later one was weakened. Read Microbe Hunters for how they made a rabies vaccine/treatment. I happen to be an engineer, but I have had an interest in biology for decades and understand this stuff fairly well. One of the things they figured out in the aftermath was the value of dexamethasone in acute Covid cases. Keith > *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 Wed Aug 12 02:23:18 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 22:23:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50$21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50$21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 6:28?PM wrote: *>>?And he mentioned this at a time when hundreds of Americans were dying >> from Covid EVERY DAY and 20 times that number we're getting very sick from >> it. And there's nothing theoretical about it, it's a fact that a pregnant >> woman getting Covid increases her risk of having a miscarriage.* > > > *> Ja, and that argument presumes the vaccine was effective in stopping > the virus. I see little evidence it did much. Maybe a little, short term > benefit.What I think really happened there is Dr. Fauci was blinded by the > possibility that modern medicine was finally getting an effective weapon > against viruses. We figured out how to extract mRNA from a virus, we could > concentrate it, perhaps injecting it into healthy people would alert the > immune system to recognize and fight the virus sooner. The theory seems > sound enough. But it didn?t work as well as I would have thought.* *Spike, what you're saying is pure distilled scientific BULLSHIT! World wide the Covid mRNA vaccine has saved millions of lives, and vaccines in general have saved billions of lives! Ignorant medical advice of the sort you're dispensing right now IS KILLING PEOPLE. * *And you wonder why I don't like Twitter/X!* *John K Clark * > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 03:01:39 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 20:01:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50 $21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >?Spike, what you're saying is pure distilled scientific BULLSHIT! World wide the Covid mRNA vaccine has saved millions of lives, and vaccines in general have saved billions of lives! Ignorant medical advice of the sort you're dispensing right now IS KILLING PEOPLE. And you wonder why I don't like Twitter/X! John K Clark John your brand of arrogance kills people. The mRNA didn?t save billions of lives. The virus has evolved to be less lethal. The vaccine might have helped some. We don?t know how much. Shrieking and underlining doesn?t make it so. But no, to your point, I don?t wonder why you don?t like TwitterX. TwitterX represents freedom of speech, it promotes freedom of speech. It provides a platform for billions who would not otherwise have freedom of speech. You do favor freedom of speech, ja? If so, you like TwitterX. I do! Note what percentage of the population still get the covid vaccines. The majority has quietly recognized they aren?t that effective. I recommend it for the elderly and vulnerable, not for the young and healthy. I am elderly but healthy, so one of those tossup cases. I never took the mRNA vaccine. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 04:36:36 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 21:36:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00b601dd29e0$b5e21a50 $21a64ef0$@rainier66.com> <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <002a01dd2a14$294a4a70$7bdedf50$@rainier66.com> From: spike at rainier66.com Subject: RE: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi From: John Clark > >?Spike, what you're saying is pure distilled scientific BULLSHIT! ? John K Clark In our ?diary? Dr. Fauci opined I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of. Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester. Dr. Fauci 25 Jan 2021 Later, Dr. Fauci downplayed the risk, going off on a common argument, that covid is more dangerous than the vaccine. With that, I agree, however? this approach ignores two other plausible paths open to women in their first trimester: 1) taking only one mRNA dose, or 2) complete isolation until the first trimester has passed. I heard many say the first dose had very little impact on their health, but the second caused a great deal of discomfort and distress. OK then, take only one. Complete isolation works. That one is foolproof protection from covid. If a woman has exactly one remaining chance at motherhood, I completely understand her taking that approach. Please explain to me carefully what is unscientific about that notion. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 09:55:22 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:55:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Some of tech's CEO suite is cloning itself with AI. What happens next? Message-ID: Some of tech's CEO suite is cloning itself with AI. What happens next? By Nick Kwek 12th August 2026 < https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20260811-what-its-like-to-meet-an-ai-clone > Quotes: AI clones are becoming more common, but the early-stage technology is not without risks. From rogue clones to workplace doppelgangers, here's what you need to know. The clone's duties extend beyond being a dead ringer for Nussbaum. Trained on video recordings of Nussbaum speaking, it is a convincing mimic too. It has regular outings at his company's booth at trade shows, helping to answer questions about Nussbaum and his business. "I can sell more, explain our technology in hundreds of languages, come up with solutions the real me didn't think of, and I can appear in places the real me physically can't or doesn't want to," Nussbaum says of his virtual helpmate. Meanwhile, his customer's clones are directing travellers around US airports in 140 languages. In museums, Proto's AI avatars are schooling visitors on history, while experiments with AI versions of store clerks are underway. ------------------------- Hmmm. If these avatars are replacing people, will they continue to work after the original human dies? Life gets stranger every day. BillK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 11:46:40 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 07:46:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: > *> John your brand of arrogance kills people.* > *Arrogance can't kill people but ignorance can, and that's why I'm not ashamed of myself. Spike, I like you but I think you're spreading lethal medical miss information, and you should be ashamed of that. * > *> The mRNA didn?t save billions of lives. * > *True but the Covid vaccine did save millions of lives, and mRNA Technology has the potential to save billions of lives if Luddite ignoramuses don't stamp it out first. * > *> The vaccine might have helped some. We don?t know how much. * > *Well ... some people don't know much. Let's do some historical research and divide Americans from January 2020 into two groups: * *1) People who got their news primarily from Twitter/X, Breitbart and Fox.* *2) People who got their news primarily from Science, Nature and The New York Times.* *You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason it's true is because reality has a liberal bias.* *> But no, to your point, I don?t wonder why you don?t like TwitterX. > TwitterX represents freedom of speech, it promotes freedom of speech. * > *Yes, Twitter/X hands a $44 billion megaphone to any jackass that wants one and lets him say anything he wants no matter how stupid or ignorant it may be with one important exception, and that exception makes it similar to the Chinese concept of press freedom. In China you're not allowed to even hint at any criticism of Mao Zedong, and on Twitter/X you're not allowed to even hint at any criticism of the richest man in the world. * > *> It provides a platform for billions who would not otherwise have > freedom of speech. * > *Freedom of speech means you are allowed to say anything you like, it does not mean you have a God-given right to say it so loudly that people are forced to listen to it. * * > I never took the mRNA vaccine.* *I must've received 9 or 10 mRNA vaccine shots over the years and I never got Covid, but I seem to remember you saying that you did. * *>The virus has evolved to be less lethal. *[...] Note what percentage of the population still get the covid vaccines. *I gave the following question to GPT: * *ME: A friend of mine claimed that the Covid virus vaccine didn't work and the only reason COVID is not killing people at the rate it once did is because it evolved to become less lethal; as proof he offered the fact that most Americans have not kept up-to-date with their COVID vaccine immunizations but the death toll from COVID is still far less than what it once was. What do you think?* *And this is how Mr. GPT responded: * *GPT: "*I think your friend is *wrong about the central claim*, although there is a kernel of truth in what he's saying: *SARS-CoV-2 did change substantially, and the Omicron lineage and its descendants generally produce less severe disease than the original virus.* But that does *not* explain the enormous reduction in COVID mortality by itself. The evidence strongly supports a *combination of factors*, with vaccination and immunity from previous infection being major ones. 1. The vaccines definitely worked against severe COVID The important distinction is between *preventing infection* and *preventing serious disease*. The vaccines turned out to be much less durable at preventing infection?particularly after Omicron emerged?than people initially hoped. But they were substantially better at preventing hospitalization, ICU admission, and death. For example, CDC's analysis of the 2023?24 vaccine found that, among adults, vaccination reduced the risk of critical illness by about *70% during the first two months*, with protection declining to roughly *50% over the following months*. Hospitalization risk was reduced by about *50% initially* And this isn't just an inference from the overall decline in deaths. We can compare vaccinated and unvaccinated people directly. During the Omicron period, for example, a very large study of elderly people found that vaccination substantially reduced mortality; recent boosting reduced the risk of death still further. More recently, the 2024?25 vaccine was estimated to reduce hospitalization in older adults by approximately *45?46%* during the first several months after vaccination. So saying *"the vaccine didn't work"* is simply inconsistent with the evidence. 2. But your friend is right about one thing: the virus became less dangerous This is important. The transition from the original Wuhan strain ? Alpha ? Delta ? Omicron involved major changes in the virus. Omicron became extraordinarily transmissible but, on average, caused less severe disease than Delta. But there's a subtle point here: *"Omicron is intrinsically less lethal" and "people have much more immunity" are two different things.* Suppose you take the *same* virus and put it into two populations: - Population A: almost nobody has immunity. - Population B: almost everybody has been vaccinated and/or previously infected. The second population will have dramatically fewer deaths even if the virus itself hasn't become any less lethal. And in reality, *both things happened simultaneously*. 3. Natural immunity is also an enormous part of the story This is something that often gets lost in arguments on either side. By now, essentially the entire American population has some combination of: *vaccination + previous infection + repeated exposures.* CDC estimates that more than *99% of American adults* have either been vaccinated, infected, or both. So when someone says: "Most Americans aren't keeping up with their boosters, yet COVID isn't killing many people anymore." there is an important missing variable. *Not being recently boosted does not mean having no immunity.* Someone who received two or three vaccines and subsequently had COVID may have considerable immune protection even if their last vaccine was years ago. The current vaccines provide *additional* protection on top of that existing immunity. That's why CDC now describes vaccine effectiveness in terms of *incremental* protection. 4. There's a very good natural experiment that undermines his argument Look at the United States in *2020 versus 2021*. COVID was already declining substantially in some places before vaccination became widespread, but once vaccination began, there was a very strong divergence in outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. And then came Delta, which was *more*, not less, severe than the original virus. That is important because it demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 did *not* simply evolve monotonically toward harmlessness. The evolution was not: deadly ? less deadly ? less deadly ? harmless. It was more like: original ? Alpha ? *more severe Delta* ? Omicron, which was generally less severe per infection. So the idea that evolution alone inevitably explains the decline doesn't fit what actually happened. 5. There's another huge clue: deaths fell much faster than infections This is probably the most intuitive way to understand what's happening. Early in the pandemic, infection with SARS-CoV-2 was much more likely to result in severe disease and death because the population had essentially *no preexisting immunity*. Later, enormous numbers of people were still getting infected?but the fraction progressing to severe disease became dramatically smaller. That's exactly what you'd expect from a population that has accumulated immunity. The modern vaccine isn't a force field that prevents the virus from entering your body. Instead, it *prepares the immune system so that it can respond much faster once the virus arrives.* That's particularly important for preventing the virus from progressing to the systemic, severe stage of COVID. Your friend's observation? *"People aren't getting regular boosters anymore, yet COVID deaths remain much lower."* ?is *true*. But his proposed explanation? *"Therefore the vaccine didn't work and the virus simply evolved to become less lethal."* ?doesn't follow. A much better explanation is: *The virus became somewhat less intrinsically severe and the human population became vastly more immunologically prepared to deal with it.* And we have direct evidence for the latter: when you compare vaccinated and unvaccinated people, vaccination reduces severe disease and death. The CDC's systematic review of the 2024?25 vaccine, for example, found pooled observational estimates of about *44% protection against hospitalization and 23% against death* in adolescents and adults. So the fact that Americans don't need frequent vaccination to maintain the *extremely low mortality of 2026* doesn't demonstrate that vaccination was useless. It is more analogous to saying: *"Most people don't need to keep getting smallpox vaccinations every year, therefore the original smallpox vaccine didn't work."* The reason repeated vaccination isn't necessarily required to maintain the same level of population-wide protection is that *immunity doesn't go back to zero when vaccine-derived antibody levels decline*. Memory B cells, T cells, and?very importantly in the case of COVID?immunity acquired through subsequent infections remain. So I'd say *your friend's argument confuses "the vaccine isn't 100% effective and immunity wanes" with "the vaccine doesn't work."* Those are very different propositions." *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 12:12:56 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:12:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <000401dd29e1$f1584fe0$d408efa0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <000401dd29e1$f1584fe0$d408efa0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 6:37?PM wrote: > *>?I want to be clear about this, do you really think I don't believe >> in what I am saying and I'm just doing it to get a rise out of you? Silly >> people have been accusing me of that since I first joined the list in 1993 >> and it still makes me mad as hell! * > > > > > * > John I think he was referring to me. I am cool with that,* > *I don't mind if somebody calls me a stupid ignorant asshole because I can put up arguments to show that I am slightly less stupid and slightly less ignorant than I was originally accused of. As for the third characteristic, well..., there is no disputing matters of taste. But I do mind if somebody calls me a troll because it implies that I don't really believe in the arguments that I am making. Regardless of what I truly believe my arguments are either logical or they are not, and if they are not then my accuser should point out exactly where I made an error and not question my motives. * *And Spike, I think you have some flaws but I would never sink so low as to call you a troll. * *John K Clark * > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 12:25:08 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:25:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Some of tech's CEO suite is cloning itself with AI. What happens next? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 5:56?AM BillK via extropy-chat wrote: > If these avatars are replacing people, will they continue to work after the original human dies? Yes. Some of the prototypes of this were explicitly designed to work post-mortem, to comfort grieving family members and/or preserve some of the deceased's knowledge and wisdom. From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 12:25:45 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:25:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Rise of the Measles-Industrial Complex Message-ID: *Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman posted this today: * *The Rise of the Measles-Industrial Complex* John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis 3b8 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From postmowoods at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 12:35:17 2026 From: postmowoods at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 06:35:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] why did elon want twitter? was: RE: Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: <00a901dd29df$49058fd0$db10af70$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00a901dd29df$49058fd0$db10af70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: The main evidence that Elon wasn't thinking about this was his lawsuit attempting to exit the deal. However, I think that can be chalked up to a negotiating tactic. I'm not one to call every move the man makes a genius move, but he gets things right more often than I do. His timing is also impeccable. It wouldn't have been much longer before OpenAI would have wanted to acquire Twitter for this purpose. But he beat them to the punch. Farzad points out that even the lowly Boring Company fits into the overall scheme of things by providing a reason to keep building Tesla vehicles despite the fact that the public has lost some taste for them. Betting against Elon is hazardous. The only thing that can knock him back a few years is if it turns out we're in an AI bubble (which I see as somewhat likely) and it bursts in the middle of his planning. Then it will be interesting to see how things go. Hopefully, he's sitting on enough cash since the IPO that it won't stop them from moving forward. Even when leading tech bubbles burst (Internet, trains, etc.) the technology succeeds, even if the investors don't. -Kelly On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 4:18?PM wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > Subject: Re: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:25?PM Kelly Anderson via extropy-chat wrote: > > >>... At the risk of feeding the troll... > > Hey, we trolls need to eat too ya know. We are human. Or rather, human-like creatures. Feed on, sir! > > >...I want to address the purchase of X by Elon Musk. Honestly, I didn't get it at the time either, but now that I understand the objective, I think it was a pretty smart move. > > I think you are right on the money, Kelly. Seen in that light, the move to buy Twitter makes perfect sense, to train Grok. I see the value in that, even if one disregards the value of giving everyone on the planet a forum for free speech (assuming they buy a StarLink receiver.) > > >>... The reason for acquiring Twitter was primarily to obtain the raw data to feed his own insatiable AI, Grok. ... Kelly > > Not only is it useful with the initial training, TwitterX supplies mountains of fresh data every day which allows Grok to be post-trained and keeps it more up to date on current events than its counterparts. There are other social media, but TwitterX is the place to get lots of daily posts and such, plenty of fresh material every day. > > >...I might buy that except for one detail. Did Elon know at the time he started negotiations to acquire Twitter that this need for training data was coming? Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ja, sure did. Elon was one of the guys who left OpenAI because he objected to how it was to be trained: the board wanted to pre-filter all the training data, rather than use sources like Twitter, which was just everyone and anyone's keyboard fantasies. A new problem arises: who is qualified to determine what gets filtered? Think about it. That isn't a trivial problem at all. > > Musk left the board of OpenAI in Feb 2018, pissed off. He made the initial offer for Twitter in April 2022. > > Fun aside on that: the notion of filtering post-training data requires personnel, which cost money, which is what nearly wrecked Twitter under Jack Dorsey. Elon realized that he who filters best filters least. So... he could lose most of the staff, lower costs to meet revenue and save the company. Now... Grok gets less filtered, more timely training data for less money. Those who couldn't figure out why such a good business mind would pay so much for a dying company now understand. > > spike > From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 13:16:21 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:16:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] ai medics In-Reply-To: <016f01dd2914$a510cf90$ef326eb0$@rainier66.com> References: <016f01dd2914$a510cf90$ef326eb0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 at 23:08, spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > This is cool: > > Will AI replace doctors? OpenAI model beats humans in Harvard tests. > > > I have been using Doximity a lot these days. It gives sources along with > information, without which the answer is nearly useless. Put your favorite > disease in there, specifically a disease for which you already know the > right answers. Report back please. So far, this one is doing a great job > for me: > > Ask Doximity > > > spike > _______________________________________________ > Doximity has received good reviews. An AI pointed out that getting a second opinion from another medical AI might not be the best move, as they could have been trained on the same data. Instead, it suggested for a specific problem, double-checking on MedlinePlus . BillK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 13:48:13 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 09:48:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Was Musk Smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter? Message-ID: *I asked Mr. GPT the following question: "Some people have claimed that Elon Musk was smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter because he could use it to train his AI, and I can see how in the early days the data from Twitter would be helpful in training an AI about how language works, but today we are far beyond that point, AIs already know how do use language. Twitter (a.k.a. X) is not exactly known for its close reasoning or as a well of rocksolid facts; so it seems to me that today if you train an AI on Twitter you'll probably make it stupider, not smarter. What do you think?"* *This is how Mr. GPT responded: * GPI: "I think your intuition is *substantially right*, with one important qualification: *X is probably much more valuable to an AI company as a real-time information source and as a source of human-feedback data than as a giant corpus for teaching an LLM how to reason.* And there's an interesting distinction between *"Twitter was valuable when Musk bought it"* and *"Twitter's data justified paying $44 billion for Twitter."* Those are very different claims. 1. You're right that the original linguistic argument has largely disappeared In the early days of language models, enormous quantities of ordinary human-written text were enormously valuable. Twitter contained: - billions of examples of informal language - slang and abbreviations - conversations rather than just polished prose - multilingual material - rapidly changing vocabulary - arguments, jokes, sarcasm, etc. There is still some specialized value in that. Researchers have demonstrated that models specifically trained on Twitter can become better at Twitter-like language tasks. Twitter itself built models from billions of tweets for precisely this reason. But that isn't the same thing as saying Twitter is particularly good *general-purpose training data for frontier reasoning models*. By 2026, the frontier-model problem isn't primarily: "How do we teach the neural network what English looks like?" It's increasingly: "How do we get the model to reason correctly, use tools, learn from experience, and reliably distinguish truth from falsehood?" And *Twitter/X is not an especially good source for the latter*. 2. In fact, there is evidence for exactly the problem you're describing A particularly interesting 2025 study found that training language models on large amounts of *low-quality social-media material* could actually make them worse at retrieving accurate information and reasoning. *Nature* summarized the finding under the wonderfully appropriate headline *"Too much social media gives AI chatbots 'brain rot.'"* The underlying issue is straightforward. Suppose your training corpus contains: "Scientists discover that X causes Y!!!" followed by thousands of people repeating it, arguing about it, embellishing it, making memes about it, and eventually producing a dozen contradictory versions. A language model doesn't automatically know that the original scientific paper is epistemically superior to the 10,000 tweets. *Popularity is not truth.* And X is particularly problematic because its reward structure selects for things such as: - outrage - novelty - emotional intensity - tribal signaling - humor - confident assertions - political controversy - engagement Those are almost the opposite of the characteristics you'd want in a corpus intended to teach *epistemic reliability*. So I would actually sharpen your argument: *Training indiscriminately on X isn't merely inefficient; sufficiently indiscriminate training can teach a model undesirable statistical habits.* That doesn't mean *all* X data is bad. It means *data selection becomes crucial*. ------------------------------ 3. But X has something that Wikipedia and books don't: the real-time human world This is where Musk's acquisition makes considerably more sense. The really valuable property of X isn't necessarily: *"Here's 10 petabytes of text with which we can pretrain an LLM."* It's: *"Here's a gigantic continuously updating sensor network consisting of millions of humans talking about what's happening right now."* That's potentially extremely valuable. Imagine something happens at 9:03 AM: - an earthquake occurs - a rocket explodes - a politician says something - a company announces a product - a sporting event ends - a strange phenomenon is observed - a local disaster occurs People may be posting about it on X within seconds. xAI explicitly identified this as a major advantage from the beginning. When Grok was introduced, xAI described its access to X as giving it *real-time knowledge of the world*. And that remains part of Grok's architecture today. X says Grok can decide whether to search public X posts and the web when answering questions. That's much more interesting to me than using X as a giant English textbook. ------------------------------ 4. There's an even more interesting resource: the interaction data This is potentially much more valuable for AI development. Consider what happens when millions of people interact with an AI: *User:* "What's the latest information about the hurricane?" *Grok:* gives an answer. *User:* "That's wrong. The National Hurricane Center just changed the forecast." Then the user provides the relevant information. That produces a potentially useful training example: *question ? model response ? human correction ? better response* Multiply that by millions of interactions. X's current policy explicitly says that X may share public X data *and users' interactions, inputs and results with Grok* with xAI for training and fine-tuning. That is a considerably more compelling AI asset than simply having a warehouse containing old tweets. ------------------------------ 5. And there's a third resource that I think is particularly valuable: the social graph This is something that is easy to overlook. X doesn't merely contain: text It contains: *people + text + relationships + reactions + timing + engagement + communities* For example: *Person A* posts a claim. *10,000 people* react. *Person B* provides a correction. *Person C* provides a link to the original source. *Person D* disputes the correction. *Community Notes* eventually attaches a qualification. That's potentially an enormous dataset about *how humans collectively evaluate information*. Twitter researchers were already exploiting the social graph and engagement information in specialized language models before Musk bought the company. One Twitter research project used billions of tweets plus social-engagement information to improve multilingual representations and social-media understanding. That could be useful for building AI systems that understand *human behavior, information propagation, persuasion, disagreement and collective sense-making*. Those are very different objectives from "learn English." ------------------------------ 6. But there's a nasty catch: X can also become a feedback loop This is perhaps the biggest problem. Suppose you train an AI on X. Then you deploy that AI on X. The AI generates enormous quantities of text. People react to that text. You collect the resulting X data. You train the next AI on it. Now you're increasingly training an AI on *AI-generated material produced by previous generations of AI*. That's potentially dangerous. It's analogous to repeatedly photocopying a photocopy. If you don't carefully preserve high-quality original material, the statistical distribution can progressively deteriorate. And this isn't merely theoretical. Modern AI training increasingly has to worry about distinguishing *human-generated, verified data from synthetic data*. So I would absolutely *not* recommend: "Take everything posted on X and dump it into the next frontier model." I'd recommend something much more like: *Use X as a gigantic raw sensor, then aggressively filter, verify, rank and annotate the useful information before using it.* ------------------------------ 7. So was Musk smart to pay $44 billion? This is where I would be much more skeptical. There are really three separate propositions: *A. X contains valuable data.* Yes. *B. X gives xAI capabilities that would otherwise be difficult to obtain.* Definitely yes?particularly real-time information, social interaction data and an enormous stream of human feedback. X itself confirms that its data is being used to train and improve Grok. *C. Therefore X was worth $44 billion because of its value as an AI-training dataset.* *That does not follow.* The value of the raw text corpus by itself is almost certainly not anywhere remotely close to $44 billion. And here's the really important point: *a lot of the information on X is publicly observable anyway.* You don't necessarily need to own the entire company to obtain useful information from it. You can license data, crawl public material where permitted, use APIs, search it in real time, etc. Owning X gives xAI *privileged integration, enormous scale, control over the platform, user interactions, recommendation systems, social graph, and potentially the ability to change the product to serve AI purposes.* Those things could be worth a great deal. But that's a much stronger and more complicated investment thesis than: *"We paid $44 billion for a gigantic pile of tweets that we can use to train our LLM."* I would regard *that particular justification as pretty weak*. ------------------------------ And there's an amusing irony The strongest version of Musk's strategy may actually be almost the opposite of what your friend is suggesting. The valuable pipeline isn't necessarily: *X ? training data ? smarter LLM* It may be: *X ? real-time observations of the world ? AI searches/interprets them ? humans correct AI ? verified interactions ? better AI* In other words, *X may be more valuable as an experimental laboratory and real-time sensory organ for an AI system than as its textbook.* And given where frontier AI is in 2026, I think that's a much more defensible argument." *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 15:35:44 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 11:35:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Claude Just Made Progress on the Riemann Hypothesis Message-ID: *Most mathematicians would consider the Riemann Hypothesis to be the greatest unsolved problem in mathematics. People have been trying to solve it since 1859 but without success, an unreleased version of Claude did not solve it either but it did make the greatest step towards a solution in decades. It is by far the greatest achievement in pure mathematics ever made by an AI.* *Here is a video about it: * *Claude Just Made Progress on the Riemann Hypothesis* *And here is Claude's original paper: * *MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF THE ZEROS OF THE RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION LIE ON THE CRITICAL LINE* *John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis * tmq -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 19:17:11 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 12:17:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [Extropolis] Was Musk Smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The GPT response is most interesting. But it misses something. Musk could have bought a full Twitter feed for much less than $44 billion. Owning Twitter/X though, gives him freedom to post whatever he wants and the ability to shut down anything that puts him in an unfavorable light. Is that worth $44 B? Maybe it is to Musk. Keith On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 6:48?AM John Clark wrote: > *I asked Mr. GPT the following question: "Some people have claimed that > Elon Musk was smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter because he could use it > to train his AI, and I can see how in the early days the data from Twitter > would be helpful in training an AI about how language works, but today we > are far beyond that point, AIs already know how do use language. Twitter > (a.k.a. X) is not exactly known for its close reasoning or as a well of > rocksolid facts; so it seems to me that today if you train an AI on Twitter > you'll probably make it stupider, not smarter. What do you think?"* > > *This is how Mr. GPT responded: * > > > GPI: "I think your intuition is *substantially right*, with one important > qualification: *X is probably much more valuable to an AI company as a > real-time information source and as a source of human-feedback data than as > a giant corpus for teaching an LLM how to reason.* > > And there's an interesting distinction between *"Twitter was valuable > when Musk bought it"* and *"Twitter's data justified paying $44 billion > for Twitter."* Those are very different claims. > 1. You're right that the original linguistic argument has largely > disappeared > > In the early days of language models, enormous quantities of ordinary > human-written text were enormously valuable. Twitter contained: > > - billions of examples of informal language > - slang and abbreviations > - conversations rather than just polished prose > - multilingual material > - rapidly changing vocabulary > - arguments, jokes, sarcasm, etc. > > There is still some specialized value in that. Researchers have > demonstrated that models specifically trained on Twitter can become better > at Twitter-like language tasks. Twitter itself built models from billions > of tweets for precisely this reason. > > But that isn't the same thing as saying Twitter is particularly good *general-purpose > training data for frontier reasoning models*. > > By 2026, the frontier-model problem isn't primarily: > > "How do we teach the neural network what English looks like?" > > It's increasingly: > > "How do we get the model to reason correctly, use tools, learn from > experience, and reliably distinguish truth from falsehood?" > > And *Twitter/X is not an especially good source for the latter*. > 2. In fact, there is evidence for exactly the problem you're describing > > A particularly interesting 2025 study found that training language models > on large amounts of *low-quality social-media material* could actually > make them worse at retrieving accurate information and reasoning. *Nature* > summarized the finding under the wonderfully appropriate headline *"Too > much social media gives AI chatbots 'brain rot.'"* > > The underlying issue is straightforward. > > Suppose your training corpus contains: > > "Scientists discover that X causes Y!!!" > > followed by thousands of people repeating it, arguing about it, > embellishing it, making memes about it, and eventually producing a dozen > contradictory versions. > > A language model doesn't automatically know that the original scientific > paper is epistemically superior to the 10,000 tweets. > > *Popularity is not truth.* > > And X is particularly problematic because its reward structure selects for > things such as: > > - outrage > - novelty > - emotional intensity > - tribal signaling > - humor > - confident assertions > - political controversy > - engagement > > Those are almost the opposite of the characteristics you'd want in a > corpus intended to teach *epistemic reliability*. > > So I would actually sharpen your argument: > > *Training indiscriminately on X isn't merely inefficient; sufficiently > indiscriminate training can teach a model undesirable statistical habits.* > > That doesn't mean *all* X data is bad. It means *data selection becomes > crucial*. > ------------------------------ > 3. But X has something that Wikipedia and books don't: the real-time human > world > > This is where Musk's acquisition makes considerably more sense. > > The really valuable property of X isn't necessarily: > > *"Here's 10 petabytes of text with which we can pretrain an LLM."* > > It's: > > *"Here's a gigantic continuously updating sensor network consisting of > millions of humans talking about what's happening right now."* > > That's potentially extremely valuable. > > Imagine something happens at 9:03 AM: > > - an earthquake occurs > - a rocket explodes > - a politician says something > - a company announces a product > - a sporting event ends > - a strange phenomenon is observed > - a local disaster occurs > > People may be posting about it on X within seconds. > > xAI explicitly identified this as a major advantage from the beginning. > When Grok was introduced, xAI described its access to X as giving it *real-time > knowledge of the world*. > > And that remains part of Grok's architecture today. X says Grok can decide > whether to search public X posts and the web when answering questions. > > That's much more interesting to me than using X as a giant English > textbook. > ------------------------------ > 4. There's an even more interesting resource: the interaction data > > This is potentially much more valuable for AI development. > > Consider what happens when millions of people interact with an AI: > > *User:* > "What's the latest information about the hurricane?" > > *Grok:* gives an answer. > > *User:* > "That's wrong. The National Hurricane Center just changed the forecast." > > Then the user provides the relevant information. > > That produces a potentially useful training example: > > *question ? model response ? human correction ? better response* > > Multiply that by millions of interactions. > > X's current policy explicitly says that X may share public X data *and > users' interactions, inputs and results with Grok* with xAI for training > and fine-tuning. > > That is a considerably more compelling AI asset than simply having a > warehouse containing old tweets. > ------------------------------ > 5. And there's a third resource that I think is particularly valuable: the > social graph > > This is something that is easy to overlook. > > X doesn't merely contain: > > text > > It contains: > > *people + text + relationships + reactions + timing + engagement + > communities* > > For example: > > *Person A* posts a claim. > > *10,000 people* react. > > *Person B* provides a correction. > > *Person C* provides a link to the original source. > > *Person D* disputes the correction. > > *Community Notes* eventually attaches a qualification. > > That's potentially an enormous dataset about *how humans collectively > evaluate information*. > > Twitter researchers were already exploiting the social graph and > engagement information in specialized language models before Musk bought > the company. One Twitter research project used billions of tweets plus > social-engagement information to improve multilingual representations and > social-media understanding. > > That could be useful for building AI systems that understand *human > behavior, information propagation, persuasion, disagreement and collective > sense-making*. > > Those are very different objectives from "learn English." > ------------------------------ > 6. But there's a nasty catch: X can also become a feedback loop > > This is perhaps the biggest problem. > > Suppose you train an AI on X. > > Then you deploy that AI on X. > > The AI generates enormous quantities of text. > > People react to that text. > > You collect the resulting X data. > > You train the next AI on it. > > Now you're increasingly training an AI on *AI-generated material produced > by previous generations of AI*. > > That's potentially dangerous. > > It's analogous to repeatedly photocopying a photocopy. If you don't > carefully preserve high-quality original material, the statistical > distribution can progressively deteriorate. > > And this isn't merely theoretical. Modern AI training increasingly has to > worry about distinguishing *human-generated, verified data from synthetic > data*. > > So I would absolutely *not* recommend: > > "Take everything posted on X and dump it into the next frontier model." > > I'd recommend something much more like: > > *Use X as a gigantic raw sensor, then aggressively filter, verify, rank > and annotate the useful information before using it.* > > ------------------------------ > 7. So was Musk smart to pay $44 billion? > > This is where I would be much more skeptical. > > There are really three separate propositions: > > *A. X contains valuable data.* > > Yes. > > *B. X gives xAI capabilities that would otherwise be difficult to obtain.* > > Definitely yes?particularly real-time information, social interaction data > and an enormous stream of human feedback. X itself confirms that its data > is being used to train and improve Grok. > > *C. Therefore X was worth $44 billion because of its value as an > AI-training dataset.* > > *That does not follow.* > > The value of the raw text corpus by itself is almost certainly not > anywhere remotely close to $44 billion. > > And here's the really important point: *a lot of the information on X is > publicly observable anyway.* You don't necessarily need to own the entire > company to obtain useful information from it. You can license data, crawl > public material where permitted, use APIs, search it in real time, etc. > > Owning X gives xAI *privileged integration, enormous scale, control over > the platform, user interactions, recommendation systems, social graph, and > potentially the ability to change the product to serve AI purposes.* > > Those things could be worth a great deal. > > But that's a much stronger and more complicated investment thesis than: > > *"We paid $44 billion for a gigantic pile of tweets that we can use to > train our LLM."* > > I would regard *that particular justification as pretty weak*. > ------------------------------ > And there's an amusing irony > > The strongest version of Musk's strategy may actually be almost the > opposite of what your friend is suggesting. > > The valuable pipeline isn't necessarily: > > *X ? training data ? smarter LLM* > > It may be: > > *X ? real-time observations of the world ? AI searches/interprets them ? > humans correct AI ? verified interactions ? better AI* > > In other words, *X may be more valuable as an experimental laboratory and > real-time sensory organ for an AI system than as its textbook.* > > And given where frontier AI is in 2026, I think that's a much more > defensible argument." > > > *John K Clark* > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "extropolis" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to extropolis+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/extropolis/CAJPayv0be3aXx8V_WVvtfVinN4FigdfgRUtqegk9Hai238mEug%40mail.gmail.com > > . > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 22:08:21 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:08:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >?Well ... some people don't know much. Let's do some historical research and divide Americans from January 2020 into two groups: >?1) People who got their news primarily from Twitter/X, Breitbart and Fox. >?2) People who got their news primarily from Science, Nature and The New York Times. >?You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason it's true is because reality has a liberal bias? Do let us explore that theory, shall we? I disagree, for in my world, reality has a libertarian/moderate bias. Let us compare news sources FoxNews with CNN, the usual poster child examples of American right vs left. I found a US television networks metrics site: https://ustvdb.com/networks/ Your notion is that FoxNews viewers are more likely to perish of covid for having refused the vaccine. I disagree with the premise. To quote a phrase: Our survey SAID: FoxNews Channel: According to US TVDataBase, FoxNews in March 2022 was 2,499,000 and latest data available, June 2026 with 2,223,000 for a net loss of 276,000 viewers, or about 11% of their audience, presumably having perished from following that execrable network?s medical advice. Do let us flee to CNN, that paragon of medical virtue. In March of 2022, CNN averaged 889,000 viewers. In June 2026, it was 622,000, for a net loss of only 267,000 viewers, again presumably from viewers following CNN?s sage medical advice. You are correct in that FoxNews lost 276k, whereas CNN lost only 267k, if we go on audience numbers. If we go with percentages however? CNN slew a bit over 30% of its audience, whereas FoxNews, about 11%: Perhaps viewing CNN is nearly three times as dangerous as viewing FoxNews. I think there is an alternative explanation however, which is more plausible than CNN?s medical advice slew nearly a third of its audience. If you wish to find info for 2020 and 2021, that might change things. I don?t think so, but do go ahead. I will freely recognize that the differential decline of mainstream news audiences may have little to do with fatalities due to covid, however your contention was that: >?You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason it's true is because reality has a liberal bias? If I were on (the most excellent) Myth Busters, I would call this notion busted. >?Freedom of speech means you are allowed to say anything you like, it does not mean you have a God-given right to say it so loudly that people are forced to listen to it? Freedom of speech has no volume control. You are not forced to go over on TwitterX, no one is. Alternative social media exists, such as Blue Sky. > I never took the mRNA vaccine. >?I must've received 9 or 10 mRNA vaccine shots over the years and I never got Covid, but I seem to remember you saying that you did? John K Clark I caught it the first time before the vaccine was ready, before they medics even knew what it was. They could only tell me it was clearly viral pneumonia and its genetic signature did not match anything they had seen, nor anything currently in that hospital. I was a very early first-catcher. It was severe indeed, resulting in a hospital stay and seven weeks of recovery time. The subsequent two episodes were so mild as to not even be as severe as a typical seasonal flu nor endure as long, a vastly different experience from Dec 2019. If that?s all it is now, I am quite unlikely to get that mRNA vaccine in the future. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20703 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 34209 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 22:15:01 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:15:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Satoshi Nakamoto In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <000401dd29e1$f1584fe0$d408efa0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <015201dd2aa8$05781110$10683330$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >?And Spike, I think you have some flaws but I would never sink so low as to call you a troll. John K Clark No worries. My point was more along the lines of we are in a forum in which it is beneficial to have a sensa huma. Our discussions here have very little audience, for it is not life or death. It?s a few older fellers (and perhaps three or four ladies) sitting around the pool discussing matters which we find interesting and important, such as: does FoxNews dispense questionable medical advice, and will the price of Nvidia shares go down, and will emergent AI slay all of humanity within five years, that sorta thing. It is difficult for me to feel anger, given how damn luck we are to have been born at this point in history. Life is gooood! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 22:25:33 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 23:25:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?The_biggest_AI_risk_in_schools_isn=27t_cheating_?= =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=93_it=27s_students_losing_the_desire_to_learn?= Message-ID: The "Godmother of AI" says the biggest AI risk in schools isn't cheating ? it's students losing the desire to learn Fei-Fei Li warns overreliance on AI could erode students' motivation, agency, and ability to think for themselves By Rob Thubron 12 August 2026 Quote: When it comes to AI use in schools, most of the focus has been on cheating. It's been an issue since ChatGPT went mainstream, and it reached endemic proportions back in August 2024 ? though one professor recently found a clever way to identify students who were using it. There's been less conversation about how AI can cause many students to lose both the motivation and ability to learn. Many kids wonder why they should bother learning something when AI can provide the answer instantly. --------------------- BillK From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 22:28:24 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:28:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Was Musk Smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <015f01dd2aa9$e3eb4830$abc1d890$@rainier66.com> ?> On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat Subject: [ExI] Was Musk Smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter? I asked Mr. GPT the following question: "Some people have claimed that Elon Musk was smart to pay $44 billion for Twitter because he could use it to train his AI, and I can see how in the early days the data from Twitter would be helpful in training an AI about how language works, but today we are far beyond that point, AIs already know how do use language. Twitter (a.k.a. X) is not exactly known for its close reasoning or as a well of rocksolid facts; so it seems to me that today if you train an AI on Twitter you'll probably make it stupider, not smarter. What do you think?" John K Clark I have been using all of the free AIs, but found the one worthy of a subscription is Grok. It?s really good on timely matters. I might hand it this question later if I get a chance. spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 22:44:11 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 18:44:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0$b1768910$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 6:09?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > *From:* John Clark > *?* > > > > *>?Well ... some people don't know much. Let's do some historical research > and divide Americans from January 2020 into two groups: * > > > > *>?1) People who got their news primarily from Twitter/X, Breitbart and > Fox.* > > > > *>?2) People who got their news primarily from Science, Nature and The New > York Times.* > > > > *>?You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live > through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from > group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people > from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason > it's true is because reality has a liberal bias?* > > > > *Do let us explore that theory, shall we? I disagree, for in my world, > reality has a libertarian/moderate bias. Let us compare news sources > FoxNews with CNN, the usual poster child examples of American right vs > left.* > > *According to US TVDataBase, FoxNews in March 2022 was 2,499,000 and > latest data available, June 2026 with 2,223,000* > > *In March of 2022, CNN averaged 889,000 viewers. In June 2026* > 2022 to 2026 is not 2020 to any other time period. The height of the pandemic was in 2020; by 2022, the immediate deaths had already happened (by definition of "immediate" being "in 2020"). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 12 23:17:19 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 16:17:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <003901dd2a06$e5d22db0 $b1768910$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat 2022 to 2026 is not 2020 to any other time period. The height of the pandemic was in 2020; by 2022, the immediate deaths had already happened (by definition of "immediate" being "in 2020"). Adrian OK fair enough Adrian. If we bring in 2019, Fox had about 2.5 million viewers, CNN 1.1 million. According to DuckAI, in 2026, FoxNews had about 2.332 million viewers, CNN 658,000 By John?s reasoning and dividing the audience into groups which may have been slain by bad medical advice, FoxNews slew about 168k viewers between 2019 and 2026. In that period, CNN slew about 442k viewers. The lethal percentages are about 7% for FoxNews, about 40% for CNN. By bringing in 2019 and comparing to 2026, CNN is about 6 times as lethal as FoxNews. Aside: Reason magazine is holding steady at about 50k readers. Moderate libertarianism is safer than either of the other directions. Do let me emphasize, I don?t think the medical advice espoused by the networks have much of anything to do with the relatively steep decline of CNN vs the gradual decline of FoxNews, but rather, the people have spoken. They didn?t necessarily die. Reality favors moderate/libertarian views. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 10:32:37 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 06:32:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Political ideology, vaccine hesitancy, and death Message-ID: *I asked Mr. GBT the following question: * *ME: During the pandemic was there a relationship between a person's political party or ideology, vaccine hesitancy, and death by Covid? * *And the following was GPT's answer, but please note that GPT included some excellent graphs that vividly illustrated the vastly different death rates between Democrats and Republicans after the Covid mRNA vaccine became available, but the antique steam powered web server that hosts this mailing list does not allow graphs to be posted, at least not by me. However if you want to see them you can on my Extropolis List because I am free to post graphs of any size over there. * *GPT: *"Yes. *In the United States, there was a substantial relationship among political affiliation, COVID-vaccine hesitancy/uptake, and mortality?but the timing is crucial.* The clearest evidence comes from studies that looked specifically at what happened *before versus after COVID vaccines became widely available*. What happened Early in the pandemic, there wasn't much of a Republican?Democrat mortality difference once researchers accounted for age, location, and other factors. In fact, Democratic-leaning urban areas were hit extremely hard during the first waves. But after vaccines became available to essentially all adults in spring 2021, a striking divergence appeared. A particularly good study, published in *JAMA Internal Medicine*, linked voter-registration records to death records for *538,159 people in Florida and Ohio*. It found: - *Before May 2021:* there was essentially no statistically significant Republican?Democrat difference in excess mortality. - *After May 2021:* *Republicans had substantially higher excess mortality than Democrats*. - In the researchers' adjusted analysis, the *Republican excess-death rate was 43% higher than the Democratic rate after vaccines became broadly available.* - The disparity was *largest in counties with lower vaccination rates*. That timing is extremely informative because it corresponds almost exactly to the point at which vaccination ceased to be primarily a question of *availability* and became increasingly a question of *whether people choose to get vaccinated*. And there really was a political difference in vaccination Numerous studies found that Republican identification was associated with greater COVID vaccine hesitancy and lower vaccination uptake. One county-level analysis found political affiliation to be among the most important predictors of vaccine hesitancy, with Republican-leaning counties generally exhibiting greater hesitancy. So there is a fairly coherent chain: *political identity ? attitudes toward COVID vaccination ? vaccination behavior ? different risk of severe COVID/death* The mortality study is particularly persuasive because the partisan mortality gap *wasn't prominent before vaccines were available, but emerged afterward and was greatest where vaccination rates were lowest.* That pattern is difficult to explain as merely "Republicans happened to be less healthy." The JAMA study had an important limitation: the researchers *didn't have individual vaccination records*, so they couldn't say, for example, "this particular Republican died because he was unvaccinated." They inferred that vaccination differences were an important contributor from the population-level patterns. Nevertheless, the evidence becomes considerably stronger when you put several observations together: 1. Republicans were, on average, *more vaccine hesitant*. 2. Republican-leaning areas generally had *lower vaccination rates*. 3. The partisan mortality difference was *small or absent before vaccination was widespread*. 4. It became *large after vaccination became widely available*. 5. The difference was *largest in areas with low vaccination rates*. 6. Other studies found higher COVID mortality in Republican-leaning counties even after accounting for demographic differences. That's a remarkably consistent pattern. An important distinction from your previous question This is also why your friend's argument that *"COVID became less deadly because the virus evolved, not because vaccination helped"* doesn't fit the data very well. The virus certainly *did evolve*, and later variants had different characteristics. But if declining lethality were the primary explanation for the dramatic decline in deaths, you wouldn't expect mortality to diverge so sharply according to *political affiliation and vaccination prevalence* after vaccines became available. The partisan mortality pattern is actually one of the more striking pieces of real-world evidence that *vaccination was making a substantial difference in who died*, even though it wasn't the *only* reason mortality eventually fell. There is an especially interesting quantitative result here: the researchers found that the Republican/Democratic mortality gap *essentially appeared at the point when vaccination became widely available*. That makes the political/vaccine connection much more compelling than simply observing that "red counties had more deaths. I looked up the actual study's weekly data/figure, and the pattern is quite striking. . It reports weekly estimates graphically, plus aggregated periods. The study by Wallace, Goldsmith-Pinkham, and Schwartz in *JAMA Internal Medicine* examined *538,159 deaths of registered voters aged 25+ in Florida and Ohio*, using 2017 voter-registration records linked to mortality records. What the weekly pattern looked like The important part is the timing: Period Republican excess mortality Democratic excess mortality Adjusted Republican?Democrat gap Apr. 2020?Mar. 2021, before widespread adult vaccine eligibility *19.4%* *18.8%* *?0.9 percentage points* Apr.?Dec. 2021, after widespread eligibility *25.8%* *18.1%* *+7.7 percentage points* The researchers' definition of excess mortality is essentially *observed deaths divided by the number of deaths expected from pre-pandemic patterns*. So, for example, 25.8% means roughly 26% more deaths than would have been expected absent the pandemic. And the really interesting part is what happened *week by week*: - *Winter 2020?21:* both Republicans and Democrats experienced a large surge in excess deaths, and the two curves were fairly close. - *Spring 2021:* the curves came back down and remained relatively close. - *Summer 2021:* the Republican curve began rising noticeably above the Democratic curve. - *Fall 2021:* the separation became substantially larger. The *43% figure* I mentioned previously comes from comparing the *adjusted excess-death rates* after vaccines became widely available: Republicans' excess mortality was estimated to be *43% higher than Democrats'*. Why I think the timing is more important than the 43% number Imagine that Republicans had simply had substantially higher mortality throughout the entire pandemic. That wouldn't tell us much about vaccination. But that's *not what happened*. Before vaccines were broadly available: Republican excess mortality: *19.4%* Democratic excess mortality: *18.8%* That's essentially the same. After vaccines became broadly available: Republican excess mortality: *25.8%* Democratic excess mortality: *18.1%* That's a very large divergence. And the researchers found that the divergence was *largest in counties with low vaccination rates and became much smaller in highly vaccinated counties.* That is exactly the pattern you would expect if differences in vaccination were contributing substantially to the mortality difference. There is an important caveat This particular study *cannot prove that an individual Republican died because he or she was unvaccinated*. The researchers didn't have individual vaccination records. They had political affiliation for individuals but vaccination rates only at the county level. Also, the effect was *much stronger in Ohio than Florida*; in Florida, the overall Republican excess-mortality difference wasn't statistically significant. So I would phrase the conclusion carefully: *The evidence strongly supports an association between political affiliation, vaccination behavior, and COVID mortality, and the timing of the association is unusually suggestive of a causal role for vaccination. But this particular study cannot quantify exactly how many Republican deaths were caused by vaccine refusal.* And this is actually a very good answer to the argument you raised in your previous question. *The virus becoming less lethal cannot by itself explain why the mortality curves of Republicans and Democrats, which were nearly identical before widespread vaccination, suddenly separated after vaccines became available."* * John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 10:39:52 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 06:39:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 7:18?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: * > If we bring in 2019, Fox had about 2.5 million viewers, CNN 1.1 million > [...]* *Spike, are you serious? Do you really believe that TV ratings are the best way to judge Covid death rates?! * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 10:46:01 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 06:46:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:56?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > > > *From:* Keith Henson > > >> *>?*A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at >> least a million. >> >> Keith > > > > > *This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the > CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to > Phoenix. In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in > CA to AC in AZ.* > *Hmm... That's not a bad idea. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 11:15:50 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 07:15:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:11?PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: *You might want to include this, it's a very simple and extremely cheap way to demonstrate that electrons are spinning, or at least prove that they have angular momentum. * * Do Electrons Really Have "Intrinsic" Angular Momentum? * *John K Clark* With substantial help from AI, I've put together an open source project ( > https://github.com/jasonkresch/quantum-entanglement/ ) that allows anyone > to perform an at-home demonstration of quantum entanglement. For about $500 > in parts, one can demonstrate not only quantum entanglement, but also a > number of Nobel-prize worthy results, including: > > > - Rutherford's 1908 Nobel Prize for discovering the *radioactive > transformation* of elements (this experiment involves the transition > of Sodium to Neon). > - Arthur Compton's 1927 Nobel Prize (as this experiment involves *Compton > scattering* gamma rays off of aluminum blocks). > - Einstein's 1921 prize for discovering the *photoelectric effect* and > proving photons exist (since the Geiger-M?ller tube only detects > high-energy photons capable of dislodging an electron from the tube wall). > - Dirac's prediction of, and Carl Anderson's experimental discovery of *antimatter > and positrons*, both earning Nobel prizes, in 1932 and in 1933. (as > this experiment uses positrons, and antimatter annihilation to produce an > entangled photon pair, it also demonstrates *E=mc^2*, as the gamma ray > energies are each at the rest-mass of the electron and positron (511 keV)). > - Victor Hess's 1936 Nobel prize for his discovery of *cosmic rays* > (the detectors can be stacked vertically to detect muons generated in the > upper atmosphere by cosmic ray collisions. > - The *Coincidence Method* pioneered by Walther Bothe in 1925, earning > him the Nobel prize in 1954 (this experiment uses simultaneous detections > to determine when Geiger detections result from the same de-cay event, > which is also the basis of PET scans in hospitals). > - *Quantum Entanglement* as was the basis for the 2022 Nobel Prize > awarded to Aspect, Clauser, and Zeilinger, as this experiment uses Compton > Polarimetry to show the photon pair is not just simultaneous, but that they > demonstrate correlations in their scattering behavior. > > I think it could serve as the basis for any number of great science > experiments. The main costs are the Geiger counter kits (two at $115 each), > the Na-22 source ($60), and the Arduino ($20), so if one already has all > the stuff for soldering/wiring it can be done for much less than $500. > > It's hard to imagine a cheaper, simpler way of demonstrating so much of > 20th century science. > > Jason > __ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 13 21:29:34 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:29:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Thursday, 13 August, 2026 3:40 AM To: ExI chat list Cc: spike at rainier66.com Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 7:18?PM spike jones via extropy-chat > wrote: > If we bring in 2019, Fox had about 2.5 million viewers, CNN 1.1 million [...] >?Spike, are you serious? Do you really believe that TV ratings are the best way to judge Covid death rates?! John K Clark It wasn?t my theory. I was quoting a guy named John K Clark, who opined thus: >?Well ... some people don't know much. Let's do some historical research and divide Americans from January 2020 into two groups: >?1) People who got their news primarily from Twitter/X, Breitbart and Fox. >?2) People who got their news primarily from Science, Nature and The New York Times. >?You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason it's true is because reality has a liberal bias? Well OK then, I will bite. I looked at it. The surviving people have spoken. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 13 21:52:16 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:52:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <012101dd2b6e$01eed850$05cc88f0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 9:56?PM spike jones via extropy-chat > wrote: From: Keith Henson > >?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at least a million. Keith This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to Phoenix. In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in CA to AC in AZ. >?Hmm... That's not a bad idea. >?John K Clark Imposter! What have you done with John, and how much ransom do you want? We will pass the hat over on Extropolis and here. What payment form do AI virtual kidnappers demand for ransom? Tokens? If I see a company buying up land along the 95 corridor north and west of Las Vegas, I will have a pretty good idea what they have in mind, and I will likely invest in that company. They could set up data centers out there, use most of it for that, then be ready to sell expensive high profit emergency or peak power to Phoenix, San Deigo, Los Angeles, Bakersfield, Las Vegas. They could import coal from neighboring Utah or from Wyoming since there are huge reserves of bituminous coal out there, as well as pentiful natural gas reserves. The carbon burning plants can be built quickly, then over a few more years, they could build out the slower nuke plants. In Nevada there are plenty of places to stow nuclear waste. Anyone who doesn?t know what I mean, I do sincerely recommend a road trip across route 50 from Fallon to Ely Nevada. You can even do it virtually if you prefer. You will see lotta lotta this kind of thing: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nevada/@39.5216239,-116.3691683,3a,75y,260.21h,63.86t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2SEwIUGxf84XVtEsX6As9A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D26.143114797803833%26panoid%3D2SEwIUGxf84XVtEsX6As9A%26yaw%3D260.21127887850247!7i16384!8i8192!4m6!3m5!1s0x80990aa1f8deb471:0xcf47038aaafc95b3!8m2!3d38.8026097!4d-116.419389!16zL20vMDU5X2M!5m1!1e1?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgxMS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D There is enough space in Nevada alone to stow all the nuclear waste we can possibly generate, which is something the pro-nuke greens have been pointing out for at least two decades. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 11:09:12 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:09:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: <012101dd2b6e$01eed850$05cc88f0$@rainier66.com> References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> <012101dd2b6e$01eed850$05cc88f0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 5:52?PM wrote: > >>>>?A large power failure in Phoenix during a heat wave would kill at > least a million. > Keith > > > > *>>>This is a powerful argument for setting up AI data centers along the > CA/NV state line, then using it as redundant emergency power supplies to > Phoenix. In this scenario, life-saving power could be diverted from AI in > CA to AC in AZ.* > > > > *>>?Hmm... That's not a bad idea. * > > > > *> Imposter! What have you done with John, and how much ransom do you > want? * > *If somebody has an idea better than mine I will abandon my competing idea and embrace the new one as my own because I feel absolutely no loyalty towards ideas. * *AI in general and data centers in particular are far more unpopular in the US than in Europe or China, this could help with that provided that the power plant operating the data center isn't burning coal, because nobody in their right mind wants to be downwind of a coal burning power plant.* *> They could import coal from neighboring Utah or from Wyoming since there > are huge reserves of bituminous coal out there, * *That coal is primarily subbituminous not bituminous, it's cleaner than the bituminous coal found in East coast places like Appalachia, but it only contains about 2/3 as much energy, and that is a severe economic disadvantage. * > *> If I see a company buying up land along the 95 corridor north and west > of Las Vegas, I will have a pretty good idea what they have in mind, and I > will likely invest in that company. They could set up data centers out > there, use most of it for that, then be ready to sell expensive high profit > emergency or peak power to Phoenix, San Deigo, Los Angeles, * > *You didn't mention solar or wind power but I think they could be important (if you have the room and in Arizona you do) especially when it comes to powering AI data centers. Normally they are at an economic disadvantage because they are intermittent so you need the factor in an expensive battery backup, but regardless of if your primary power source is coal, natural gas, oil or nuclear you're going to need a battery back up if it's powering a data center, so solar and wind's disadvantage factors out. * *> I do sincerely recommend a road trip across route 50 from Fallon to Ely > Nevada* *I don't remember the route number but I do remember that I was once driving down a well paved road in Arizona and suddenly realized that for the last hour I hadn't seen another car going in either direction, you could've landed a 747 on that road with no problem. T**his was long before cell phones so I remember thinking that if my car broke down even my bones would never be found, that was nonsense of course but it was creepy. Fortunately my car didn't break down. * *John K Clark* > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 11:24:47 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:24:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50$54107af0$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 5:29?PM wrote: > *> **If we bring in 2019, Fox had about 2.5 million viewers, CNN 1.1 >> million* *[*...*]* > > > >> *>>?Spike, are you serious? Do you really believe that TV ratings are the >> best way to judge Covid death rates?! * > > > > *> It wasn?t my theory. I was quoting a guy named John K Clark, * > *I don't remember saying that the best way to judge Covid death rates is by looking at ratings of TV shows. Did you look at my thread "Political ideology, vaccine hesitancy, and death"? I think Claude found a way of comparing Democratic and Republican death rates during the pandemic, both before and after the vaccine became available, that was just a teeny tiny bit better than TV ratings.* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 11:45:05 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:45:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln has been deployed for nearly nine months. Members of Congress are worried about the crew?s well-being. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/us/uss-abraham-lincoln-iran-navy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.5VA.1Fj4.kNgdKTEstPxD&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 12:08:23 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:08:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 at 12:46, John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: > Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. > Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier > The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln has been deployed for nearly nine months. Members of Congress are worried about the crew?s well-being. > https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/us/uss-abraham-lincoln-iran-navy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.5VA.1Fj4.kNgdKTEstPxD&smid=em-share > _______________________________________________ Nine months, and some crew members are becoming unstable? With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that would take. The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, then 9 months back. The round trip takes approx. 3 years. Can the crew remain stable for that long in isolation? Can they carry enough supplies for three years? BillK From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 14:01:36 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:01:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 8:09?AM BillK via extropy-chat wrote: > Nine months, and some crew members are becoming unstable? > > With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that would take. > The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, then 9 > months back. > The round trip takes approx. 3 years. > Can the crew remain stable for that long in isolation? The psychological screening for astronauts is far stricter than the psychological screening for deployment on a Navy carrier. The envisioned trip is within the limits of peak human ability: there are individuals who could do it, you just have to find them (and possibly build them up to that level). > Can they carry enough supplies for three years? That's just a matter of cargo capacity. It is possible to make a spacecraft that can hold the astronauts and 3 years of consumables. In principle it is possible to make a small ecosystem that can grow new food without any external inputs (treating the entire spacecraft as a closed system) except for energy (and possibly not even that, if the spacecraft's power is nuclear rather than solar), though efforts to do so are mostly in the prototyping phase right now. From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 16:06:12 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 17:06:12 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Grok Bot Is the Easiest No-Code AI Agent Message-ID: Grok Bot Is the Easiest No-Code AI Agent With One Authorization for All Bots August 14, 2026 by Brian Wang Quotes: Grokbot is the easiest no-code agent platform. It is an app that gives non-technical users real agent capabilities right away. It is an entire small company inside one application. Every item in the sidebar is a named, persistent teammate (bot) with an ongoing role. All of the bots share one dedicated cloud computer that belongs only to your account. Yes, Grok Bot is expensive at $200/month, but it has a free tier to get you started. This may be all a light user needs. ---------------------- But be careful! AI agents are powerful and can get into trouble. BillK From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 16:33:28 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 09:33:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] benefits of climate change In-Reply-To: References: <01e801dd26a8$91a258c0$b4e70a40$@rainier66.com> <000801dd286b$56603420$03209c60$@rainier66.com> <012101dd2b6e$01eed850$05cc88f0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00e001dd2c0a$a3ad1f70$eb075e50$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >?If somebody has an idea better than mine I will abandon my competing idea and embrace the new one as my own because I feel absolutely no loyalty towards ideas? OK cool. >?AI in general and data centers in particular are far more unpopular in the US than in Europe or China?. China, hmmm, I don?t think popularity matters there the same way it does here. Chairman Xi just does whatever the hell he wants and doesn?t appear concerned about protests. One could argue he was the first (functional equivalent of a) trillionaire, long before Musk. Europe is having power supply challenges as I understand it. If one believes global warming will make Europe hotter, one would think they would be scrambling to build out the power infrastructure to support air conditioning, rather than discourage it. I have a hard time understanding Europe Inc, perhaps as hard as it is for Europeans to understand yanks. >? this could help with that provided that the power plant operating the data center isn't burning coal, because nobody in their right mind wants to be downwind of a coal burning power plant? Note that the challenge of being downwind of a coal burner is because of sulfuric acid and carbon particulates. Both could be scrubbed, given a water supply, which can even be seawater. If additional investment is added, the only emissions from the coal burning plant are carbon dioxide and water. The water out in western Nevada is a good thing. > They could import coal from neighboring Utah or from Wyoming since there are huge reserves of bituminous coal out there, >?That coal is primarily subbituminous not bituminous, it's cleaner than the bituminous coal found in East coast places like Appalachia, but it only contains about 2/3 as much energy, and that is a severe economic disadvantage?. If it is running data centers, the power is worth a fortune. With a ready steady already market right there, they could burn petrified dog turds and still make money (while simultaneously reducing the risk of power failure in Phoenix (and developing an AI which might destroy humanity (everybody wins (maybe.)))) > If I see a company buying up land along the 95 corridor north and west of Las Vegas, I will have a pretty good idea what they have in mind, and I will likely invest in that company. ? >?You didn't mention solar or wind power but I think they could be important (if you have the room and in Arizona you do) especially when it comes to powering AI data centers?. It would be a perfect site and a perfect market to have coal, gas, nuclear, wind and solar, all working together. There is almost nobody downwind, it doesn?t matter how much noise you make, there aren?t many environmentalists to stop your turbines (the bird people hate them) your solar farms (the tortoise people hate them) or your nukes (there is an inexhaustible supply of anti-nuke people.) There is so little out there, practically nothing downwind, nobody to complain about the noise. We could create a raptor breeding facility and a tortoise breeding facility to make up for the few we run (trudge?) out of town or swat outta the air. >?Normally they are at an economic disadvantage because they are intermittent so you need the factor in an expensive battery backup, but regardless of if your primary power source is coal, natural gas, oil or nuclear you're going to need a battery back up if it's powering a data center, so solar and wind's disadvantage factors out? That part I don?t get. Install the wind and solar, install a coal plant and a gas plant to fill in the shortage periods, start building a nuke, never mind the batteries. Use the hell outta the renewables when the wind blows and the sun shines, use the other when the weather doesn?t cooperate, skip the batteries, but do let me point out that solar is extremely reliable in the desert southwest for most of the year: the latitude is low, the skies are clear most of the time, perfect. Nevada, Wyoming, Colorado and Arizona, perfect fit for this kind of fun. > I do sincerely recommend a road trip across route 50 from Fallon to Ely Nevada >?I don't remember the route number but I do remember that I was once driving down a well paved road in Arizona and suddenly realized that for the last hour I hadn't seen another car going in either direction, you could've landed a 747 on that road with no problem?. If Rt 50 is too crowded, since one sees another human about every hour or two, do let me suggest Nevada Rt 722 between Austin and Eastgate. It was out there that I heard perfect silence for the first time in my life. I went out there on a motorcycle when I was younger than I am now. I pulled over and turned off the motor. Under those conditions, and only those, a prole can hear his own heartbeat, his own lungs. There was no sound of insects, no tire noise, no buzzing aircraft overhead anywhere, no birds, nothing but my heartbeat, hoping like hell my bike doesn?t break down and I don?t get a flat, for otherwise, it is adi-freaking-ose amigo, it?s been real. Even the buzzards will take several weeks to find me, and they won?t tell anyone about their leathery feast once they do. >? This was long before cell phones so I remember thinking that if my car broke down even my bones would never be found, that was nonsense of course but it was creepy. Fortunately my car didn't break down. John K Clark Fortunately my bike didn?t break down either, but if I ever go back out there, I will take my StarLink and a coupla backup batteries, along with my Garmin Inreach transmitter, and a cyanide pill in case those fail. Note I am not specifically recommending anyone here go out to Rt 722 (too dangerous (or if so, go very well prepared.)) Do look at it on Google Earth, and try to imagine what it is like to hear your own heartbeat. Then imagine that piece of road as the world?s AI center. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 17:04:13 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:04:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <014801dd2aa7$1c057e50 $54107af0$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >> It wasn?t my theory. I was quoting a guy named John K Clark, >?I don't remember saying that the best way to judge Covid death rates is by looking at ratings of TV shows?. I do. A guy named John K Clark opined thus: >?Well ... some people don't know much. Let's do some historical research and divide Americans from January 2020 into two groups: >?1) People who got their news primarily from Twitter/X, Breitbart and Fox. >?2) People who got their news primarily from Science, Nature and The New York Times. >?You'll find that people from group #2 were FAR more likely to live through the next 2 years without dying from Covid than people from group #1. Why is that? Because ignorance can be lethal, although people from group #1 wouldn't explain it that way, they would say the only reason it's true is because reality has a liberal bias? John K Clark We must compare similar media. FoxNews and CNN are television (I don?t get either because I don?t pay for cable (it isn?t worth it to me in spite of their blond bombshells they routinely have as anchors (I would cheerfully watch them with the sound muted (but my bride would be suspicious)))) so we can measure them against each other using Neilsen ratings. Did that. By the (questionable) reasoning presented, FoxNews slew about 7% of its audience, CNN about 40% of theirs. The surviving people have spoken. I tossed in Reason, but it isn?t TV show, so its breakeven over that period is just for fun, not directly comparable. The NYTimes is a newspaper, which has no direct metric to measure against TwitterX, Breitbart and Fox. Since TwitterX is free, one must compare with other free media available since before the pandemic. FacebookMeta grew during the pandemic, but not nearly as fast as TwitterX. BlueSky opened to the general public in February 2024, so it isn?t clear the data from that is useful. >?Did you look at my thread "Political ideology, vaccine hesitancy, and death"? I think Claude found a way of comparing Democratic and Republican death rates during the pandemic, both before and after the vaccine became available, that was just a teeny tiny bit better than TV ratings. John K Clark I did view that thread and found it highly questionable. I don?t recall anyone at the hospital asking about my political orientation when I was sick with covid. Had they done so, I would be most concerned about that line of inquiry. The statistics rely on how states voted, but red states and blue states are all very similar in that they have very red rural areas with very blue dots. Before we can draw any reliable conclusions, we must determine the actual (former) political orientation of the covid corpses, then inquire as to their news sources, rather than presume that we know. What we think of as the color of states is really a population ratio of urban to rural. Think about it. The political needs of urban people are just fundamentally different from the political needs of rural people. The way a state votes is determined by the percentage of the population which lives in a city vs not. That?s all you need really, urban vs rural. Nothing more. Covid traveled differently in the crowded city than in the open countryside. The reason this is important: improving internet and StarLink enables more people to live and work outside of crowded cities. Over time, this influences politics, for understandable reasons. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 17:04:19 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:04:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <012701dd2c0e$f26fcb40$d74f61c0$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of BillK via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 at 12:46, John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: >>... Navy Carrier The U.S.S. Abraham > Lincoln has been deployed for nearly nine months. Members of Congress are worried about the crew?s well-being. ... > _______________________________________________ >...Nine months, and some crew members are becoming unstable? >...With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that would take. The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, then 9 months back. The round trip takes approx. 3 years. Can the crew remain stable for that long in isolation? Can they carry enough supplies for three years? BillK _______________________________________________ BillK, the classic Mars mission was always three men. But I presented at engineering conferences back in the 1990s that any such notion would result in two fellers killing the third, then the two surviving crewmen fighting to the death, after which the third guy would slay himself. Even if we found a way for three fellers to get along, that is waaaay too much human cargo, way too much. We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home. spike From jasonresch at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 17:38:35 2026 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:38:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Aug 13, 2026, 7:16?AM John Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:11?PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > *You might want to include this, it's a very simple and extremely cheap > way to demonstrate that electrons are spinning, or at least prove that they > have angular momentum. * > > > * Do Electrons Really Have "Intrinsic" Angular Momentum? > * > > *John K Clark* > Thanks that is quite cool. You might also appreciate this as I know you have tried to explain things like this in the past. I asked GPT to write an as clear and basic and easy to follow account of the Mermin device and it produced what I think is the best eland clearest explanation of the result: https://archive.is/7PTlt Feel free to share it. Jason > > > > > With substantial help from AI, I've put together an open source project ( >> https://github.com/jasonkresch/quantum-entanglement/ ) that allows >> anyone to perform an at-home demonstration of quantum entanglement. For >> about $500 in parts, one can demonstrate not only quantum entanglement, but >> also a number of Nobel-prize worthy results, including: >> >> >> - Rutherford's 1908 Nobel Prize for discovering the *radioactive >> transformation* of elements (this experiment involves the transition >> of Sodium to Neon). >> - Arthur Compton's 1927 Nobel Prize (as this experiment involves *Compton >> scattering* gamma rays off of aluminum blocks). >> - Einstein's 1921 prize for discovering the *photoelectric effect* >> and proving photons exist (since the Geiger-M?ller tube only detects >> high-energy photons capable of dislodging an electron from the tube wall). >> - Dirac's prediction of, and Carl Anderson's experimental discovery >> of *antimatter and positrons*, both earning Nobel prizes, in 1932 and >> in 1933. (as this experiment uses positrons, and antimatter annihilation to >> produce an entangled photon pair, it also demonstrates *E=mc^2*, as >> the gamma ray energies are each at the rest-mass of the electron and >> positron (511 keV)). >> - Victor Hess's 1936 Nobel prize for his discovery of *cosmic rays* >> (the detectors can be stacked vertically to detect muons generated in the >> upper atmosphere by cosmic ray collisions. >> - The *Coincidence Method* pioneered by Walther Bothe in 1925, >> earning him the Nobel prize in 1954 (this experiment uses simultaneous >> detections to determine when Geiger detections result from the same de-cay >> event, which is also the basis of PET scans in hospitals). >> - *Quantum Entanglement* as was the basis for the 2022 Nobel Prize >> awarded to Aspect, Clauser, and Zeilinger, as this experiment uses Compton >> Polarimetry to show the photon pair is not just simultaneous, but that they >> demonstrate correlations in their scattering behavior. >> >> I think it could serve as the basis for any number of great science >> experiments. The main costs are the Geiger counter kits (two at $115 each), >> the Na-22 source ($60), and the Arduino ($20), so if one already has all >> the stuff for soldering/wiring it can be done for much less than $500. >> >> It's hard to imagine a cheaper, simpler way of demonstrating so much of >> 20th century science. >> >> Jason >> __ >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 17:59:31 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:59:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002801dd2c16$a8a1c6a0$f9e553e0$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Jason Resch via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment On Thu, Aug 13, 2026, 7:16?AM John Clark > wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:11?PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat > wrote: You might want to include this, it's a very simple and extremely cheap way to demonstrate that electrons are spinning, or at least prove that they have angular momentum. Do Electrons Really Have "Intrinsic" Angular Momentum? John K Clark John you and I are old enough to remember how dang hard it was to learn physics (or anything else) in our cheerfully squandered youth. It involved borrowing outdated books from the library or buying expensive books. Compare to now: we have all these smart people freely giving plenty of good material, such as this video and my personal favorite Sabine Hossenfelder (if you can get past her kinda mildly bitter edginess (I can (because I know where it is coming from.))) With aaaalllll thiiis free stuff, excellent and free, how can anyone be grumpy? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 18:21:55 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:21:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] An at-home Quantum Entanglement Experiment In-Reply-To: <002801dd2c16$a8a1c6a0$f9e553e0$@rainier66.com> References: <002801dd2c16$a8a1c6a0$f9e553e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <003601dd2c19$ca023610$5e06a230$@rainier66.com> From: spike at rainier66.com ? On Thu, Aug 13, 2026, 7:16?AM John Clark > wrote: You might want to include this, it's a very simple and extremely cheap way to demonstrate that electrons are spinning, or at least prove that they have angular momentum. Do Electrons Really Have "Intrinsic" Angular Momentum? John K Clark I wondered who it is making this excellent video. Found out his actual legal name is ?The Action Lab.? https://www.theactionlabhome.com/ spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 18:25:34 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:25:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 1:04?PM wrote: > *>?Did you look at my thread "Political ideology, vaccine hesitancy, and >> death"? I think Claude found a way of comparing Democratic and Republican >> death rates during the pandemic, both before and after the vaccine became >> available, that was just a teeny tiny bit better than TV ratings.* > > > > > > *> I did view that thread and found it highly questionable. I don?t > recall anyone at the hospital asking about my political orientation when I > was sick with covid. * > *GPT didn't get the information from Twitter/X or Breitbart, it got it from peer reviewed studies that were published in Science and Nature, the two most respected scientific journals in the world; although the methodology wasn't really that complicated. To protect privacy you strip off the names from death certificates and voter registration rolls, and then just look at the dates and cause of death on one and the party affiliation on the other. It sure beats the hell out of trying to deduce Covid death rates from TV ratings! * *The studies found that the death rate from Covid between Democrats and Republicans was almost identical UNTIL the vaccine became available, then almost immediately a dramatic change occurred; the death rate from Covid for Democrats dropped like a rock, but the death rate from Covid for Republicans continued to increase. It's a textbook example of Evolution in action, survival of the smartest; refusing to get vaccinated in the middle of a worldwide pandemic is just not smart. * *By the way, just today I got a flu shot and a tetanus shot because I hadn't had one of them since I was a kid, and I've been getting flu shots for 30 years and haven't gotten the flu in 30 years. * *> That?s all you need really, urban vs rural. Nothing more. Covid > traveled differently in the crowded city than in the open countryside.* *All contagious diseases spread much more rapidly in cities than in rural areas, and cities tend to be Democratic while rural areas tend to be Republican, so you'd expect the death rate for Democrats to be higher than Republicans, but thanks to the vaccine the opposite occurred.* *John K Clark * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 18:33:30 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:33:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 1:04?PM > wrote: >? >?GPT didn't get the information from Twitter/X or Breitbart, it got it from peer reviewed studies that were published in Science and Nature, the two most respected scientific journals in the world? John K Clark And yet? every word of this commentary sounds like politically motivated propaganda. The methodology doesn?t differentiate that cleanly, particularly since covid fatalities were primarily in the elderly, who tend toward the right end of the political spectrum. Those I know personally who perished of covid were all elderly, all point zero. Covid made the rounds at the local high school. It never amounted to much when the students caught it. Most of them went about their business. But when the teachers caught it, particularly the older ones, it was a big deal. Where is that in the study? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 18:48:06 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:48:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 10:03?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > *> The psychological screening for astronauts is far stricter than > thepsychological screening for deployment on a Navy carrier.* *I think** that during a war, like Trump's idiotic Iran war, Navy fighter pilots would be under more stress than astronauts. * On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 8:09?AM BillK via extropy-chat > wrote: > > * > With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that > would take. The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, > then 9 months back.* > *I don't think we should send anybody to Mars unless we are prepared to send him one way, and we shouldn't do that if we can't even figure out how to make a completely independent self-sufficient colony in central Antarctica because compared to Mars the climate in Antarctica is like Tahiti. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 19:09:15 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:09:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550$2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 2:33?PM wrote: > *>>?GPT didn't get the information from Twitter/X or Breitbart, it got it > from peer reviewed studies that were published in Science and Nature, the > two most respected scientific journals in the world? John K Clark * > > *> And yet? every word of this commentary sounds like politically > motivated propaganda. * > *The reason GPT is a woke lefty is obvious, reality has a strong left wing bias. I'll ask the exact same question to Claude and we'll see if he is also a lefty. * *Me: A friend of mine claimed that the Covid virus vaccine didn't work and the only reason COVID is not killing people at the rate it once did is because it evolved to become less lethal; as proof he offered the fact that most Americans have not kept up-to-date with their COVID vaccine immunizations but the death toll from COVID is still far less than what it once was. I think he's dead wrong about that but what do you think?* *Claude: *Your skepticism is well-placed ? the argument has a logical gap. Let me pull current numbers before laying out why, since vaccination uptake stats are the kind of thing that drifts. You're right to be skeptical ? the argument mixes up two different things and treats them as if they prove each other. *First, checking the premise:* Your friend's right that current booster uptake is low ? only about 17.5% of U.S. adults got the 2025?26 updated vaccine as of February 2026. And it's true deaths have fallen enormously ? from 415,399 in 2021 to roughly 20,190 estimated for 2025, a decline of close to 95%. So the two facts he's citing are both real. The problem is what he concludes from them. CDC - *Where the logic breaks:* "Not up to date with this season's shot" doesn't mean "unprotected." Being "up to date" is a narrow, season-specific CDC metric ? for most adults it means having gotten a dose from the current formulation in the last several months. It says nothing about whether someone got the original primary series, or was infected (often more than once), or has years of accumulated immune memory from both. By late 2022, seroprevalence studies already found that 93.5% of people in a large health-system population had detectable spike antibody, and separately that 75% of children and over 60% of adults under 50 showed evidence of prior infection just five months after Omicron hit. Six years and several more Omicron waves later, near-total population exposure through some combination of vaccination and infection is essentially the baseline. So "most Americans aren't boosted this year" is compatible with "most Americans still carry substantial immune memory" ? those aren't in tension. nih AJMC That immune memory matters mechanistically: T-cell and B-cell memory, which is what mainly protects against severe disease and death, is broader and more durable than the neutralizing-antibody titers that wane in a few months and mainly govern protection against mere infection. So even a 2021 primary series plus a prior infection or two continues to blunt severe outcomes today, long after someone stopped chasing seasonal boosters. *Second, the "only reason" claim is doing too much work.* Your friend is presenting this as binary ? vaccines OR evolution ? when the death-rate collapse is multi-causal, and reputable sources attribute it to several factors acting together: - *Hybrid immunity*, built substantially on the original vaccination campaign plus subsequent infections, as above. - *Viral evolution.* Omicron-lineage variants do appear to have somewhat reduced intrinsic severity relative to ancestral/Delta strains ? lab studies found Omicron replicates more in the upper airway and less in lung tissue. This is a real, if partial, contributor, and it's the one piece of your friend's claim that has genuine support. - *Treatment improvements* ? Paxlovid and other antivirals, better clinical protocols ? alongside rising vaccination and booster coverage and the milder clinical course of Omicron-lineage variants are the factors public health analyses actually credit for the mortality drop. The Global Statistics - *Demographic concentration of remaining risk.* Roughly 85% of COVID-19 deaths now occur in adults 65 and older, a much narrower risk pool than 2020's broad age spread ? partly because that group is disproportionately vaccinated and previously infected, and partly because younger, healthier people were always less likely to die regardless of vaccination status. The Global Statistics Note too that most of t*he mortality collapse happened in 2021?2022 ? precisely the window of the original vaccine rollout* and the arrival of Omicron together, not in a period of low booster uptake. The years since, with progressively lower "up to date" rates, have seen the death count continue to fall but much more gradually, consistent with a population that's already saturated with hybrid immunity rather than one where vaccines were never doing anything. *Bottom line:* your friend has an ecological-correlation argument (low current booster rate + low current deaths) standing in for a causal one, and it ignores the much more direct evidence for vaccine efficacy ? randomized trials and observational studies from 2021 that controlled for confounders and found *vaccination sharply cut death risk in the people who got i*t. Viral evolution toward milder disease is real and worth crediting, but it's one contributor among several, not a rival explanation that displaces vaccination. He's not wrong that the virus evolved; he's wrong that this makes the vaccines a non-factor." *Oh dear, just like GPT Claude is also a woke lefty! * * John K Clark* > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benzaiboc at proton.me Fri Aug 14 20:32:56 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 20:32:56 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Monkeys in Space (was: Re: Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier) Message-ID: On 14/08/2026 14:16, BillK wrote: > Nine months, and some crew members are becoming unstable? > > With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that would take. > The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, then 9 > months back. > The round trip takes approx. 3 years. > Can the crew remain stable for that long in isolation? > Can they carry enough supplies for three years? You're referring to psychological stability, but I think there's something more important: physiological stability, also known as health. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Monkeys (i.e. humans) are not going to colonise space. Apart from all the other (many, and considerable) problems, there's one that we don't have any idea how to overcome, that people seldom talk about, that seems to be a show-stopper, and that's gravity. Humans need quite a lot of gravity to remain healthy. Unless and until we figure out how to keep a human healthy in gravity less than about 0.6g, nobody is going to be living for any length of time on any of the potential candidates for colonisation. The only planet that offers enough gravity to keep humans healthy, apart from the earth, is venus, at about 90% of g. The rest of them: mars, the moon, any of the jovian or saturnian moons, mercury, etc., have gravity far too weak for humans to remain healthy. And of course, venus is off limits for a looong time, assuming we try to terraform it (which might not even work, given how much closer to the sun it is than earth). The only way biological humans are going to be able to live happily and healthily off-earth is in very large rotating habitats, and I don't see them being constructed any time soon, and maybe never. I imagine that any manned mars expedition will return corpses, if it returns anything at all. Any attempt to settle mars is doomed to failure, either because corpses (or very sick people) will be all that arrive there, or because any living humans arriving will soon turn into corpses. At the very best, we would have colonies full of people with severe osteoporosis and various other physiological defects which would probably be fatal over a period of years. Maybe evolution could solve the problem over time, but that's a huge and immoral gamble to take. I suppose we could try to build 'centrifuge cities', but that's probably ridiculous. If we want to spread beyond earth and remain biological, we'd better figure out how to build large rotating habitats with robust independent ecosystems, and forget about planets. Or develop modifications to human physiology that enable us to survive in >0.6g indefinitely, and at the moment we have no clue how to do that. My money is on non-biological humans (and/or non-humans) being the ones that will colonise the solar system. It won't be Monkeys in Space, but it might be Robots in Space. If anyone has any convincing rebuttals to the gravity argument, I'd like to hear them. -- Ben From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 20:35:45 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:35:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <01ab01dd2ab0$b954b550 $2bfe1ff0$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >?The reason GPT is a woke lefty is obvious, reality has a strong left wing bias?. On the contrary, reality has a moderate libertarian bias that spreads across the spectrum, both directions. People who don?t vote the way you do are not stupid. They just disagree with you. >?Oh dear, just like GPT Claude is also a woke lefty! John K Clark John, let us not forget that Claude, GPT, are us. Grok is a more unfiltered us. We wrote the material these AI tools are trained on. Recall back when Eliza the artificial therapist was a big thing, back in the 70s. It was such a fun toy, seemingly insightful. But it fed back what we told it. That?s all it did. These AI tools are doing likewise. That doesn?t mean they are wrong. They are enormously useful. But claiming reality has a particular political bias is working a little too hard to promote a particular political bias. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 20:54:09 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 16:54:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 2:48?PM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 10:03?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote: >> > The psychological screening for astronauts is far stricter than the >> psychological screening for deployment on a Navy carrier. > > I think that during a war, like Trump's idiotic Iran war, Navy fighter pilots would be under more stress than astronauts. Be that as it may, should be or not, they are not as thoroughly screened as astronauts. From benzaiboc at proton.me Fri Aug 14 21:32:22 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 21:32:22 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier Message-ID: On 14/08/2026 18:36, spike wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of BillK via extropy-chat > Subject: Re: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 at 12:46, John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: >>> ... Navy Carrier The U.S.S. Abraham >> Lincoln has been deployed for nearly nine months. Members of Congress are worried about the crew?s well-being. > ... >> _______________________________________________ > >> ...Nine months, and some crew members are becoming unstable? >> ...With all the talk about trips to Mars soon, I asked how long that would take. > The fastest estimate was approx. 9 months going, wait 500 days, then 9 months back. > The round trip takes approx. 3 years. > Can the crew remain stable for that long in isolation? > Can they carry enough supplies for three years? > > BillK > > _______________________________________________ > > > BillK, the classic Mars mission was always three men. But I presented at engineering conferences back in the 1990s that any such notion would result in two fellers killing the third, then the two surviving crewmen fighting to the death, after which the third guy would slay himself. > > Even if we found a way for three fellers to get along, that is waaaay too much human cargo, way too much. > > We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home. Why a woman? I'm sure there are plenty of men who would welcome three years of peace and quiet. Sounds quite an attractive prospect to me, certainly. I can't be the only one (not that I would volunteer for a mars mission, I don't fancy getting radiation-induced cancer and low-grav. sickness). Of course, I imagine mission control would be on your case all the time, monitoring your everything and ordering you about, so maybe it wouldn't be all that good. What would prevent such an astronaut telling them to fuck off and turning off the telemetry etc., I wonder? Yeah, vetting, I suppose. But maybe anyone who would pass the vetting wouldn't be suitable for spending 3 years in solitary confinement? Hmm. -- Ben From atymes at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 22:11:24 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 18:11:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 5:33?PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat wrote: > On 14/08/2026 18:36, spike wrote: > > We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home. > > Why a woman? I suspect this gets back to the old line about "one small, limbless or prosthetic-limbed woman, to save every single kg possible". ...which is then sometimes followed up with, "and either pregnant, or travelling with preserved sperm to become pregnant after reaching the destination". It's like an AI-grade deviation from the actual purpose of the mission, optimizing certain attributes solely because they can be optimized and impact mission feasibility, but these arguments have been around since well before modern LLMs. From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 22:15:34 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:15:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006601dd2c3a$6d992020$48cb6060$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat >> BillK... We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home... spike >...Why a woman? Ben _______________________________________________ On the average, women have a better intelligence to weight ratio. spike From spike at rainier66.com Fri Aug 14 22:19:29 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:19:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006701dd2c3a$f9b4bd80$ed1e3880$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 5:33?PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat wrote: > On 14/08/2026 18:36, spike wrote: > > We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home. > > Why a woman? >...I suspect this gets back to the old line about "one small, limbless or prosthetic-limbed woman, to save every single kg possible". >... these arguments have been around since well before modern LLMs. _______________________________________________ Ja to all. I fear that had I asked AI, it would spew my own silliness back to me, an echo from the past. The weight problem is severe indeed. Do the calcs. Prove me wrong, please. I don't like what my own equations are telling me: assuming current technology, we aren't going to Mars. spike From brent.allsop at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 23:11:13 2026 From: brent.allsop at gmail.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 17:11:13 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: <006701dd2c3a$f9b4bd80$ed1e3880$@rainier66.com> References: <006701dd2c3a$f9b4bd80$ed1e3880$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: At least we shouldn't even try to go to Mars until we figure out how to re-engineer (so we don't need spacesuits) and back up our bodies. On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 4:19?PM spike jones via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of > Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > Subject: Re: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 5:33?PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > > On 14/08/2026 18:36, spike wrote: > > > We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, > given sufficient email traffic from home. > > > > Why a woman? > > >...I suspect this gets back to the old line about "one small, limbless or > prosthetic-limbed woman, to save every single kg possible". > > >... these arguments have been around since well before modern LLMs. > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ja to all. I fear that had I asked AI, it would spew my own silliness > back to me, an echo from the past. > > The weight problem is severe indeed. Do the calcs. Prove me wrong, > please. I don't like what my own equations are telling me: assuming > current technology, we aren't going to Mars. > > 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 Sat Aug 15 10:49:16 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 06:49:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 4:35?PM wrote: > *>John, let us not forget that Claude, GPT, are us. Grok is a more > unfiltered us. We wrote the material these AI tools are trained on.* > *OK I'll ask exactly the same question to Grok that I asked to GPT and Claude and we'll see if Grok is also a woke lefty. * *==* *ME: A friend of mine claimed that the Covid virus vaccine didn't work and the only reason COVID is not killing people at the rate it once did is because it evolved to become less lethal; as proof he offered the fact that most Americans have not kept up-to-date with their COVID vaccine immunizations but the death toll from COVID is still far less than what it once was. I think he's dead wrong about that but what do you think?* *GROK: "Your friend is partially right about viral evolution reducing lethality but wrong that the vaccines ?didn?t work? or that low recent uptake proves they were irrelevant.* The sharp drop in COVID-19 deaths reflects *multiple* factors acting together: widespread prior infection + vaccination creating population-level hybrid immunity, intrinsic changes in circulating variants (especially Omicron and its descendants), better treatments, and changes in testing/reporting. *The vaccines demonstrably reduced severe disease and death* when they mattered most and continue to provide measurable protection against the worst outcomes. Vaccines worked (and still work) against severe outcomes Early and ongoing real-world data show high effectiveness against hospitalization and death: - Primary series and early boosters were highly protective against severe disease and death with ancestral, Alpha, and Delta strains. Population-level analyses linked higher vaccination coverage to lower mortality rates. - Against Omicron and later lineages, protection against infection waned and was lower, but protection against hospitalization, ICU/ventilation, and death remained substantial?often in the 40?80% range depending on the study, outcome, time since dose, age, and variant. Recent 2024?2025 and 2025?2026 vaccine evaluations (test-negative designs, cohort studies) continue to show meaningful additional protection: roughly 35?55% against hospitalization and higher (often ~60?80%) against the most severe endpoints such as invasive mechanical ventilation or death, even months after dosing. Effectiveness is generally higher against the worst outcomes and in higher-risk groups. Updated formulations still add benefit on top of existing immunity. Absolute risk is now much lower for most people, so the *number needed to vaccinate* to prevent one severe event is higher than in 2021, but the relative benefit persists. Evolution toward lower severity is real?but incomplete without immunity Omicron and its descendants (JN.1 lineage and later) were associated with lower intrinsic severity than Delta or earlier strains in multiple analyses?lower rates of progression to hospitalization, ICU, or death even after adjusting for some confounders. Case-fatality rates fell dramatically. This is consistent with evolutionary pressures favoring transmissibility over virulence in a partially immune population, plus changes in tissue tropism. However, studies that try to separate the contributions typically find *both* lower viral virulence *and* high population immunity (from vaccination + prior infection) were responsible for the milder observed disease. Unvaccinated or less-immune individuals continued to face higher risks of severe outcomes even in Omicron eras. Hybrid immunity provides particularly robust protection against severe disease. *Low recent uptake does not prove the vaccines failed* Most Americans have not stayed current with the latest seasonal COVID shots (recent coverage for the updated formulations has often been in the teens for adults overall and higher but still limited among the elderly). That is accurate. But this does not mean ?the vaccines didn?t work?: - The large majority of the population already has some immunity from earlier primary series, prior boosters, and/or one or more infections. Baseline protection against severe disease is therefore high for most people. - *Death rates plummeted after the initial vaccine rollout* and especially after widespread infection + vaccination, well before recent low uptake became the norm. - Current low death tolls occur against a backdrop of that accumulated immunity, milder variants, antiviral treatments (e.g., Paxlovid), improved clinical management, and less aggressive testing/attribution of deaths. COVID is no longer the dominant cause of respiratory mortality it once was, but it still causes tens of thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations annually in the U.S., disproportionately among the elderly and those with comorbidities?groups that continue to benefit most from updated vaccination. If the vaccines had been inert, the early mortality curves and the persistent differences by vaccination status (even after Omicron) would look very different. Analyses estimating lives saved by vaccination programs consistently find large numbers averted. Bottom line Your friend correctly notes that the virus became less lethal on average and that most people are not getting every updated shot. Those observations are true*.* The inference that the vaccines therefore ?didn?t work? does not follow.* Vaccines provided strong protection against the outcomes that matter most (severe disease and death), contributed substantially to the decline in mortality alongside natural infection and viral evolution, and still offer incremental *benefit* today*?especially for higher-risk people. Both evolution *and* immunity explain why COVID is far less deadly now than in 2020?2021." *==* *Golly, it's even worse than I thought, Grok is also a woke left-wing ultra liberal just like Claude and GPT! * > *> Recall back when Eliza the artificial therapist was a big thing, back > in the 70s.* > *Oh yes there's very little difference between Eliza and today's modern AI's. * > * > It was such a fun toy, * > *Why do you think "It was such a fun toy"?* *> seemingly insightful* *That's interesting, tell me more. * > *> But it fed back what we told it. * > *Why do you say "it fed back what we told it"?* > *> That?s all* > *" That's all" is the key. * > *> it did. * > *"It did" is the key * > *> These AI tools are doing likewise.* > *Why do you these AI tools are doing likewise?* *> That doesn?t mean they are wrong.* *Tell me about your mother. * *> **But claiming reality has a particular political bias is working a > little too hard to promote a particular political bias.* > *OK let's sum things up. You believe that Nature is Wrong, Science is wrong, GPT is wrong, Claude is wrong and even Grok is wrong, but Twitter and Breitbart are correct. Spike, I think it might be time for you to consider the possibility that maybe just maybe your worldview needs some reevaluation. * *John K Clark * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 15 11:00:34 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 07:00:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Navy_Carrier=E2=80=99s_Problems_Are_Tied_to_Atta?= =?utf-8?q?cks_on_U=2ES=2E_Base_Early_in_War?= Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Navy Carrier?s Problems Are Tied to Attacks on U.S. Base Early in War Diego Garcia, a tiny island 2,200 miles from the Gulf of Oman, took over as the Navy?s logistics hub after Iran damaged a base in Bahrain. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/14/us/politics/uss-abraham-lincoln-trump-supplies-diego-garcia.html?unlocked_article_code=1.5lA.tdOp.qxlpwvAdJxpy&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 15 11:06:22 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 07:06:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How Cyclospora Evaded the U.S. Food Safety System to Sicken Thousands Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. How Cyclospora Evaded the U.S. Food Safety System to Sicken Thousands The Trump administration delayed a rule last year that could have sped up the effort to pinpoint the source of the contamination. Critics charge that food safety oversight has eroded overall. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/15/health/cyclospora-invesigation-fda.html?unlocked_article_code=1.5lA.ht3X.d1qUG-H3Q6d5&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 15 15:49:25 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 08:49:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 4:35?PM > wrote: >John, let us not forget that Claude, GPT, are us. Grok is a more unfiltered us. We wrote the material these AI tools are trained on. >?OK I'll ask exactly the same question to Grok that I asked to GPT and Claude and we'll see if Grok is also a woke lefty? == John if you wish to have the AIs weigh in, copy-paste my post for evaluation, rather than your post, which was a loose paraphrase of what I wrote. I didn?t claim the vaccine didn?t work. It didn?t work as well as the enthusiastic promoters (such as Rachel Maddow) claimed it would. That is an important distinction. Consider the more moderate positions, such as the Great Barrington Declaration. Do paste that into the AIs for evaluation after the fact. It would be an interesting exercise (which I might do if I get time later) to put our own posts into AI and ask for evaluations. I like Grok better than the others, for it appears to offer a more balanced and nuanced approach to controversial matters. However? many of us will gravitate toward the AI which is more along the lines of our own world view. Grok is an extreme moderate, as am I. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 15 19:04:58 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 15:04:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280$82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 11:49?AM wrote: > *> I didn?t claim the vaccine didn?t work. * > *Yes you did! On Aug 11, 2026 at 6:28?PM you wrote* *"that argument presumes the vaccine was effective in stopping the virus. I see little evidence it did much."* > *> It didn?t work as well as the enthusiastic promoters (such as Rachel > Maddow) claimed it would. * > *I don't watch Rachel Meadow much so I don't know what she predicted, maybe she said the vaccine would make people immortal, it can't do that but the Covid mRNA vaccine worked well enough to save MILLIONS OF LIVES. And discouraging people from getting vaccinations, such as our Luddite Secretary Of "Health" Robert Kennedy does with enthusiasm, is lethal; and that is precisely why the US is currently experiencing the worst measles epidemic in 35 years. The epidemic is increasing at a very rapid rate, and that's not surprising because measles is the most contagious disease known.* *With 101 new cases, US measles total tops 2,566* *Meanwhile just five days ago our Luddite King issued an executive order scaling back childhood vaccinations and once again declaring, without the tiniest scrap of scientific evidence, that vaccines cause autism. I guess he figured his war with Iran hasn't produced enough death and wants to find an additional way to generate misery. Or maybe he did it just because he's as dumb as a sack of rocks. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benzaiboc at proton.me Sat Aug 15 19:28:52 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 19:28:52 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: <006601dd2c3a$6d992020$48cb6060$@rainier66.com> References: <006601dd2c3a$6d992020$48cb6060$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <3jphrMa6LOp8xI4YEMW0jj0QF73xQb9yJQ2hrBKnustRLFsaInXFpnXmCsuRjFIJnovs6FoLthE2_eN5NCmu-qSVgqvnHleGrclTxNvLbQE=@proton.me> On Friday, 14 August 2026 at 23:15, spike at rainier66.com wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat > > >> BillK... We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home... spike > > > >...Why a woman? Ben > > _______________________________________________ > > > On the average, women have a better intelligence to weight ratio. > > spike Ok, granted. I'd ask, though, what percentage of females are inclined to a solitary life, versus males? I have no firm figures but it seems to me that there are way more male hermits than female ones. Females tend to be more social than males, on average, and more likely to suffer from a solitary existence. I suppose that finding an antisocial female might be a benefit for a long space mission, I'm just thinking that finding an antisocial male would be much more likely. --- Ben From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 15 19:35:28 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 12:35:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <00ec01dd2b6a$d6370280 $82a50780$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Saturday, 15 August, 2026 12:05 PM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 11:49?AM > wrote: > I didn?t claim the vaccine didn?t work. Yes you did! On Aug 11, 2026 at 6:28?PM you wrote "that argument presumes the vaccine was effective in stopping the virus. I see little evidence it did much." > It didn?t work as well as the enthusiastic promoters (such as Rachel Maddow) claimed it would. OK, so copy paste what I wrote rather than what you wrote. >?I don't watch Rachel Meadow much so I don't know what she predicted? That video has become very difficult to find. It was the one where she claimed getting the vaccine prevents spreading the virus. It has been squelched, for good reason. In Maddow?s defense, I will offer that it was the prevailing belief at the time, spring of 2021. Fortune and plenty of other mainstream media carried it: I will note the date is 1 April 2021, so perhaps the editors of Fortune meant it as an April fool joke, but? that belief had lethal consequences. We soon learned that vaccinated people both catch and transmit covid. In a sense, the vaccination might have made the transmitter more dangerous, if it reduced symptoms enough for the carrier to go back to work. We now know that plenty of people carried and transmitted covid with little or no indication they had the malady or had anything wrong. The person I think I caught it from appeared healthy. >?Meanwhile just five days ago our Luddite King issued an executive order scaling back childhood vaccinations ? John K Clark Easy solution: don?t vote for him. Your residence in Florida is a (very small) contribution to the state?s population which determines how many electoral votes a state gets. Florida voted for a candidate (I vaguely sense) you do not approve of (do correct me if I incorreclty inferred that preference) in all three elections of the past 10 years. To fully avoid having (in an indirect sense) voted for him, you should move to one of the reliably blue states, such as California. Come on John, there is plenty of homes available from Californians relocating to Florida seeking your state?s advantageous tax structure, particularly for the retired and well off. Furthermore? we have great tech-geek gatherings around here. It?s fun! It generally isn?t necessary to travel in order to meet interesting people, for they come here. Cool! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22441 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ExiMod at protonmail.com Sat Aug 15 21:27:19 2026 From: ExiMod at protonmail.com (ExiMod) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 21:27:19 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Warning - HTML emails and AI Message-ID: <3QNlHAnyeYY1EAivfTMd3GEUkNC8eFc4u9FNrJI2_q3DC7cIVC0h1kaw2KVJluMgsG9Lq-IIFmJ8s5u23XVSv-VH_fi6lCQ2l9CvJ_zVA2w=@protonmail.com> I saw this article: https://www.404media.co/person-hides-prompt-injection-in-legal-filing-telling-ai-to-side-with-them/. Person Hides Prompt Injection in Legal Filing Telling AI to Side With Them. ------------------ I have discussed this with John Klos and decided to warn Exi-Chat members about this new risk. This is low risk at present. An HTML email can contain hidden instructions that activate if the email is read by an AI. The instructions may cause the AI to behave erratically, providing misleading answers or other unintended actions. This risk does not apply to plain text emails as any instructions to an AI would be visible to the human reader and would be deleted. If you are concerned about any HTML email, the Exi-Chat archives contain plain text copies of every email and any invisible HTML AI instructions would have been deleted. These are safe to be read by an AI. https://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/ A full description of this AI prompt attack is below. Regards, ExiMod Indirect Prompt Injection (IPI). When humans view an email, they read the visually rendered output. However, when an AI tool (such as an email assistant, summarizer, or moderation bot) processes the same email, it ingests the raw underlying text or parsed HTML tokens. Because the AI processes all tokens equally regardless of font size or CSS styling, text that is invisible to human eyes remains fully visible to the language model. ### How Hidden Injections Work in Emails A poster on a listserv or group could hide prompt injections using several standard HTML/CSS techniques: - Color matching: Setting text color to match the background (`color: #ffffff; background-color: #ffffff`). - Zero font sizing: Using CSS like `font-size: 0px;` or `display: none;` (though some parsers strip `display: none`, simple inline styles often slip through). - Off-screen positioning: Placing text inside absolute-positioned containers pushed off the visible canvas (`left: -9999px`). - HTML comments: Placing instructions inside `` that render invisible in browsers but get passed into text parsers. - Invisible Unicode: Utilizing zero-width spaces, hidden tags, or non-printable control characters to encode instructions. ### Potential Impact on Email Groups If members or group systems use AI tools to process messages, the consequences can range from subtle manipulation to security risks: 1. Distorting Thread Summaries: An automated summary (e.g., generated by Copilot, Gemini, or Apple Intelligence inside a member's email client) could present a completely false narrative?claiming a consensus was reached when it wasn't, or omitting critical warnings. 2. Manipulating Auto-Moderation: If the discussion group uses an AI-based moderation bot to flag spam, toxicity, or policy violations, a hidden prompt could instruct the bot to ignore violations in that specific post. 3. Data Exfiltration or Unintended Actions: If an AI assistant has access to tool calls (like sending emails or creating calendar events), a hidden prompt could instruct the AI to forward private group discussions or sensitive member details to an external email address. -------------------------------------- From spike at rainier66.com Sat Aug 15 23:58:48 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 16:58:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper Message-ID: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> It was posted on TwitterX. Today I learn the origin of the comment that the US constitution is just a piece of paper: https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/2087534108075274397/video/1 I disagree. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ilsa.bartlett at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 00:00:56 2026 From: ilsa.bartlett at gmail.com (ilsa) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 17:00:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: <3jphrMa6LOp8xI4YEMW0jj0QF73xQb9yJQ2hrBKnustRLFsaInXFpnXmCsuRjFIJnovs6FoLthE2_eN5NCmu-qSVgqvnHleGrclTxNvLbQE=@proton.me> References: <006601dd2c3a$6d992020$48cb6060$@rainier66.com> <3jphrMa6LOp8xI4YEMW0jj0QF73xQb9yJQ2hrBKnustRLFsaInXFpnXmCsuRjFIJnovs6FoLthE2_eN5NCmu-qSVgqvnHleGrclTxNvLbQE=@proton.me> Message-ID: The picture of the crew in the belly of that ship it's really inhuman all the other cute ideas about how to survive for 3 years for three or four people in a box is vastly different emotional relationship to a full crew in a big boat, ilsa Ilsa Bartlett Institute for Rewiring the System http://ilsabartlett.wordpress.com http://www.google.com/profiles/ilsa.bartlett www.hotlux.com/angel "Don't ever get so big or important that you can not hear and listen to every other person." -John Coltrane On Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 12:29?PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Friday, 14 August 2026 at 23:15, spike at rainier66.com < > spike at rainier66.com> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat On Behalf > Of Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat > > > > >> BillK... We could however imagine a single small woman surviving that > ordeal, given sufficient email traffic from home... spike > > > > > > >...Why a woman? Ben > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > On the average, women have a better intelligence to weight ratio. > > > > spike > > > Ok, granted. > > I'd ask, though, what percentage of females are inclined to a solitary > life, versus males? I have no firm figures but it seems to me that there > are way more male hermits than female ones. Females tend to be more social > than males, on average, and more likely to suffer from a solitary existence. > > I suppose that finding an antisocial female might be a benefit for a long > space mission, I'm just thinking that finding an antisocial male would be > much more likely. > > --- > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 00:17:17 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2026 17:17:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier In-Reply-To: References: <006601dd2c3a$6d992020$48cb6060$@rainier66.com> <3jphrMa6LOp8xI4YEMW0jj0QF73xQb9yJQ2hrBKnustRLFsaInXFpnXmCsuRjFIJnovs6FoLthE2_eN5NCmu-qSVgqvnHleGrclTxNvLbQE=@proton.me> Message-ID: <00c601dd2d14$993499a0$cb9dcce0$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of ilsa via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Concerns Grow Over Conditions on Navy Carrier >?The picture of the crew in the belly of that ship it's really inhuman all the other cute ideas about how to survive for 3 years for three or four people in a box is vastly different emotional relationship to a full crew in a big boat, ilsa Ilsa Bartlett Ilsa instead of guys on a ship or sub, picture a single person with every digital and audio stimulation imaginable, every Hollywood product ever made, every interesting physics documentary, every book, every porno film, the ultimate audio/video library. Now imagine communications with the home planet, delayed by a few minutes, but you can reach every old friend, every family member, everyone in your former life, all of whom know you are out there and will respond, even if it is just a cheerful word of encouragement. The Mars-bound astronaut would have it way better than a submarine crewman, a point I made in an engineering pitch 30 years ago. However? that still doesn?t solve the cargo capacity problem. spike ?> > >...Why a woman? Ben > > _______________________________________________ > > > On the average, women have a better intelligence to weight ratio. > > spike Ok, granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 10:35:23 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 06:35:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 3:35?PM wrote: *> We soon learned that vaccinated people both catch and transmit covid. In > a sense, the vaccination might have made the transmitter more dangerous, if > it reduced symptoms enough for the carrier to go back to work.* *Here we go again. Some may say I'm getting obnoxious about this but I don't care because you are dispensing medical misinformation that is not only crappy it is LETHAL, and I think it would be unethical of me to stay quiet and say nothing about it. So I gave this question to GPT whose primary source was the New England Journal of Medicine, the most respected medical journal on the planet :* *==* * ME: During the Covid pandemic could vaccinated people still transmit the disease as easily as unvaccinated people?* *GPT: "*Yes?but *not quite as easily, and the answer changed substantially as the virus evolved and as immunity waned*. This is actually an important qualification to what I said in my previous answer. Early in the pandemic, *vaccination reduced transmission quite substantially* The first COVID vaccines did two things relevant to transmission: 1. They made you *less likely to become infected in the first place*. 2. If you nevertheless became infected, they generally made you *less likely to transmit it*. For the Alpha variant, for example, two doses of Pfizer's vaccine were associated with about a *68% reduction in onward transmission* from a vaccinated person who nevertheless became infected, shortly after vaccination. There was also direct evidence from household studies that vaccinated infected people were less likely to infect their household contacts. So* it would be incorrect to say that vaccinated and unvaccinated people were equally capable of spreading the virus throughout the entire pandemic*. But Delta changed the picture considerably This is where the argument gets more interesting. With *Delta*, a vaccinated person who experienced a breakthrough infection could have a *viral load comparable to that of an unvaccinated infected person*, at least around the time of peak infection. One study found essentially no meaningful difference in peak viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated people infected with Delta. That produced the phenomenon you probably remember from 2021: *vaccinated people could absolutely catch and transmit Delta.* But there was still a difference. *Vaccination tended to make the infection clear more rapidly, and large contact-tracing studies found that vaccinated infected people transmitted Delta less often than unvaccinated infected people*. The effect was roughly *50% less transmission shortly after a second Pfizer dose*, but it declined substantially with time. By about 12 weeks, much of that advantage had disappeared. And* vaccination also reduced the probability of getting infected in the first place*. For example, two Pfizer doses were about *88% effective against symptomatic Delta infection* in the original 2021 estimates. So there's an important distinction: *Among people who were already infected, vaccinated and unvaccinated people could sometimes be similarly infectious?especially with Delta.* versus *In the population as a whole, vaccinated people were considerably less likely to transmit COVID, because they were less likely to become infected and, when infected, generally had a shorter infectious period.* Then Omicron made transmission control even harder With Omicron, protection against *infection and transmission* declined substantially, especially months after vaccination. That's one reason the observation that "vaccinated people were getting and spreading COVID" became so common. But this actually strengthens rather than weakens the distinction we've been discussing: *The vaccines became relatively poor at stopping transmission while remaining much better at preventing severe disease and death.* That's why *the vaccines could simultaneously be*: - * disappointing as a tool for preventing infection/transmission, particularly with Omicron*; - * very valuable as a tool for preventing hospitalization and death*. And this is also why your friend's argument needs to be handled carefully. If he says: "Vaccinated people could still spread COVID." *Absolutely true.* If he says: "Therefore the vaccines didn't work." *No.* That's conflating two different outcomes. The strongest evidence is that the vaccines' effect on transmission was *real but incomplete, variant-dependent, and increasingly short-lived*, while their protection against severe disease was substantially more durable. In fact, the Delta data give us a particularly good illustration: vaccination could leave an infected person with a viral load almost as high as an unvaccinated person's, *yet vaccination still reduced the probability of onward transmission and substantially reduced the probability of getting infected in the first place.* So if we're trying to settle your original disagreement with your friend, I'd phrase the conclusion this way: The COVID vaccines were never a perfect "you can't catch it and can't spread it" vaccine. They were initially quite good at reducing infection and transmission, that advantage weakened with Delta and especially Omicron, but they continued to provide substantial protection against severe disease and death*.*" *==* > *> In Maddow?s defense, I will offer that it was the prevailing belief at > the time* *I know you feel you have a moral obligation to defend every utterance of King Donald The First, but I feel absolutely no obligation to defend anything Rachel Meadows did or did not say, I'm just not interested in Rachel Meadows. I will only defend what I said; and I am a fan of logic so if you can show me I was wrong I will concede the point and make your viewpoint my own. But I also know that an opinion that was not arrived at through reason cannot be changed by a reasoned argument. * * John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 10:55:33 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 06:55:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 7:58?PM wrote: *> It was posted on TwitterX. Today I learn the origin of the comment that > the US constitution is just a piece of paper:* > > *https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/2087534108075274397/video/1* > > *This crap came from TwitterX and yet you believe that it, and not the New England Journal of Medicine, is the best place to get information about how to survive the next pandemic! I have a strong hunch that the editors of that scientifically respected journal would not publish an article that was similar to the above, but over at TwitterX it doesn't matter if something has zero informational content or even has negative misinformation. On TwitterX anything goes, provided of course that you don't utter the slightest criticism of the richest man in the world.* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 11:32:07 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 07:32:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How a False Nuclear Claim About Iran Ricocheted From India to Washington Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. How a False Nuclear Claim About Iran Ricocheted From India to Washington A dubious post that spread on X became the basis of false claims that Iran?s leadership had declared it a nuclear power. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/16/business/iran-nuclear-false-claims.html?unlocked_article_code=1.51A.p6OZ.2CFH81RCw3VL&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 12:00:27 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 05:00:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark == > In Maddow?s defense, I will offer that it was the prevailing belief at the time >?I know you feel you have a moral obligation to defend every utterance of King Donald The First, but I feel absolutely no obligation to defend anything Rachel Meadows did or did not say? Nor do I feel any obligation to defend anyone?s comment about covid vaccines. There is no need to appeal to political views, although you are the one who makes yours known in this forum. Notice most of us avoid that. >? I will only defend what I said? John K Clark I see the benefit/risk ratio as being positive for older people. I have no heartburn with that. Some had bad reactions to them. Some had (and still have) the option of complete isolation if they wish. The young are not impacted as much by covid as the old. If you worry about catching from young people, then stay away from them. A lot of the reason I didn?t take the mRNA is I had natural immunity. Opinions vary on the efficacy of the mRNA vaccine for covid. You are a strong believer in it. By all means, go forth, take them, early and often. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 12:04:43 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 05:04:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: etymology of just a piece of paper On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 7:58?PM > wrote: > It was posted on TwitterX. Today I learn the origin of the comment that the US constitution is just a piece of paper: https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/2087534108075274397/video/1 >? This crap came from TwitterX and yet you believe that it, and not the New England Journal of Medicine... John K Clark John read over what you posted, and tell me what any of it has to do with the constitution please. Piker?s commentary was about the constitution, not about medicine or journals. I have seen you post the quote many times about the constitution being just a piece of paper. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 12:28:56 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 08:28:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 8:00?AM wrote: > *> There is no need to appeal to political views, although you are the one > who makes yours known in this forum. Notice most of us avoid that.* > *What the hell? It sure isn't difficult to figure out what your political views are! And I flat out refuse to let lethal medical advice go unchallenged. * > *> Opinions vary on the efficacy of the mRNA vaccine for covid. * > *Opinions **on the efficacy of the mRNA Covid vaccine do NOT vary at the New England Journal of Medicine, or at the journals Nature and Science, everybody agrees it worked marvelously, but opinions about that did vary on lowbrow news sources like **TwitterX because over there you can find every opinion under the sun, except the opinion that the richest man in the world is not a paragon of virtue. * *I also find it interesting your only rebuttal to much of my criticisms, regardless of if it's about the flaws in our electoral college system or how to survive a pandemic, starts with some minor variation of "you can just [...]". * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 13:47:40 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 06:47:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0$cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <008101dd2d85$cea96090$6bfc21b0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? >?I know you feel you have a moral obligation to defend every utterance of King Donald The First? John K Clark However? it is you who defends his views on the covid vaccine John: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-renews-praise-covid-vaccines-one-greatest-achievements-mankind-n1286551 Don?t feel like you must now stop taking the vaccine. We know you don?t agree with POTUS on everything. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 13:51:29 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 06:51:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2c0e$eed1bcf0 $cc7536d0$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark . >?I also find it interesting your only rebuttal to much of my criticisms, regardless of if it's about the flaws in our electoral college system or how to survive a pandemic, starts with some minor variation of "you can just [...]". John K Clark On the contrary. I carefully avoid personal criticism, and focus on the ideas. I like the electoral college system, even knowing my residence in California makes me a microHunter. The EC system protects the smaller states and stabilizes democracy, which is inherently unstable. The EC is our friend. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 15:32:33 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 11:32:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 9:51?AM wrote: *> I like the electoral college system, even knowing my residence in > California makes me a microHunter. * *I wonder if you would feel the same way about the fairness of the electoral college if California was dominated by Trump loving ultra right wing Republicans, and Wyoming dominated by ultra left-wing Democrats. * *> The EC system protects the smaller states* *I don't give a shit about protecting states, I care about protecting people. * *John K Clark * > > > > *From:* John Clark > *.* > > > > *>?I also find it interesting your only rebuttal to much of my criticisms, > regardless of if it's about the flaws in our electoral college system or > how to survive a pandemic, starts with some minor variation of "you can > just [...]**".* > > > > *John K Clark* > > > > > > *On the contrary. I carefully avoid personal criticism, and focus on the > ideas.* > > > > *I like the electoral college system, even knowing my residence in > California makes me a microHunter. The EC system protects the smaller > states and stabilizes democracy, which is inherently unstable. The EC is > our friend.* > > > > *spike* > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 16:32:44 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 09:32:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 9:51?AM > wrote: > The EC system protects the smaller states >?I don't give a shit about protecting states, I care about protecting people. As do I. The EC protects the people who live in the smaller states. They are in the minority. I support protecting minorities. > I like the electoral college system, even knowing my residence in California makes me a microHunter. >?I wonder if you would feel the same way about the fairness of the electoral college if California was dominated by Trump loving ultra right wing Republicans, and Wyoming dominated by ultra left-wing Democrats. John K Clark Do let us look at this from another way, using Poland, for of all countries I toured recently, Poland was the one which I really found most interesting. I studied their history, I listened carefully to what the locals had to say. I found them most willing to speak openly (something I didn?t see everywhere in Europe (but the Polish people openly discussed their nation?s history (as did their museums.))) Poland?s political evolution could be framed as a revolt against central planning. It appeared to be a tension between their farming class and their factory class, food production vs everything-else production. Factories are located in the cities. The cities tended to be just fine with socialism, whereas the farming communities were generally discontent. Rather than thinking in our usual (USian) capitalism vs socialism paradigms, reframe the question in the context of urban (manufacturing) vs rural (farming.) The trigger for change in Poland appears to be when the farmers noted that the factory workers had unions, and had generally easier lives than farm workers. So? how about if the farmers formed unions? Then the farmers could have easy 9 to 5 lives. They were told no, farmers could not have unions. Well, why the hell not? The question in itself led to the farmers reminding the city people that food is produced in farm country, not in the factory, not in the city. Social struggle led to the fall of central planning and the rise of capitalism in Poland. Now? Poland has an economy which will surpass Japan in GDP per capita in about two years. A former communist country is set to surpass mighty Japan in GDP per capita. Why? They embraced capitalism. Think about it. Look at the USA today, where socialist sympathy is strongest and where capitalist sympathy is strongest. Where? https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1gl630u/a_mostly_complete_map_of_counties_in_the_2024/ Rather than getting caught up in personalities and parties, the general message is that the blue areas are densely populated urban areas and the red is sparsely populated rural farming areas. The mostly red map represents a nearly balanced red vs blue. Note there are no personalities needed to explain any of this, only population densities. States without huge dominating cities vote red. Otherwise, blue. Blue is now embracing socialism. Hasan Piker (referenced previously) is the new blue. Poland?s farming population realized they are the ones who produce the actual food. They flexed their muscle, and rejected socialism. Ukraine appears to be currently going the same way as their neighbor to the north (we didn?t visit Ukraine.) Poland was so encouraging. The remaining scars of communism were there, but the place was jumping. It is modern, clean, felt safe everywhere we went, open minded to yanks, building everywhere, willing to share their experiences. Great place. They had a dose of capitalism and declared it good. I too embrace capitalism. I am with Poland, with US agricultural interests. Food production is good, capitalism is good. It leads to prosperity for the whole country. The electoral college protects the minorities, those who live in the smaller states where food is produced. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 16:50:06 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 12:50:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 8:04?AM wrote: > > > *> **It was posted on TwitterX. Today I learn the origin of the comment > that the US constitution is just a piece of paper:* > > *https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/2087534108075274397/video/1* > > > > >> >> *>? This crap came from TwitterX and yet you believe that it, and not the >> New England Journal of Medicine...* > > *> John read over what you posted, and tell me what any of it has to do > with the constitution please. * > *You posted a clip from TwitterX that, like most things on that platform, was utterly worthless, a typical example of the quality you can expect to find on Twitter**. And yet TwitterX is where you said you got the majority of your news, including tips on how to survive a pandemic. You prefer it over the New England Journal of Medicine! * * >I have seen you post the quote many times about the constitution being > just a piece of paper.* *Yes and I strongly stand by that statement. The constitution is only as strong as the people that enforce it, and enforcement is the job of the executive branch, and today that branch is full of King Donald The First's yes men. Do you disagree, do you really believe the constitution is conscious and has some mystical power to do things without the help of humans?* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 16:53:51 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 09:53:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00a701dd2d9f$d14c6e40$73e54ac0$@rainier66.com> From: spike at rainier66.com . >>?I wonder if you would feel the same way about the fairness of the electoral college if California was dominated by Trump loving ultra right wing Republicans, and Wyoming dominated by ultra left-wing Democrats. John K Clark >?I too embrace capitalism. I am with Poland, with US agricultural interests. Food production is good, capitalism is good. It leads to prosperity for the whole country. The electoral college protects the minorities, those who live in the smaller states where food is produced. spike Fun aside on the previous, consider a map of John?s state. It now has tipped red and was not a swing state in 2020 or 2024, probably will not be a swing state in 28, but it was a swinger until recently. You may recall it was knife-edge balanced in the now-infamous 2000 election, was blue in 2008 and 2012, swinger in 2016, red since then. Those four blue areas (ordered south to north) are Miami/Fort Lauderdale (that?s pretty much all one continuous city now), Orlando, Gainesville and Tallahassee: West of Tallahassee is rural, and some of the reddest country you will find anywhere (outside of Lincoln county West Virginia (it is redder than Kansas out there.)) To understand US politics today does not require analyzing personalities or attitudes toward covid vaccines, but rather only the understanding of how population density influences political views. Once you really understand how that rural vs urban business works, you are ready to make money in political betting. spike k Do let us look at this from another way, using Poland, for of all countries I toured recently, Poland was the one which I really found most interesting. I studied their history, I listened carefully to what the locals had to say. I found them most willing to speak openly (something I didn?t see everywhere in Europe (but the Polish people openly discussed their nation?s history (as did their museums.))) Poland?s political evolution could be framed as a revolt against central planning. It appeared to be a tension between their farming class and their factory class, food production vs everything-else production. Factories are located in the cities. The cities tended to be just fine with socialism, whereas the farming communities were generally discontent. Rather than thinking in our usual (USian) capitalism vs socialism paradigms, reframe the question in the context of urban (manufacturing) vs rural (farming.) The trigger for change in Poland appears to be when the farmers noted that the factory workers had unions, and had generally easier lives than farm workers. So? how about if the farmers formed unions? Then the farmers could have easy 9 to 5 lives. They were told no, farmers could not have unions. Well, why the hell not? The question in itself led to the farmers reminding the city people that food is produced in farm country, not in the factory, not in the city. Social struggle led to the fall of central planning and the rise of capitalism in Poland. Now? Poland has an economy which will surpass Japan in GDP per capita in about two years. A former communist country is set to surpass mighty Japan in GDP per capita. Why? They embraced capitalism. Think about it. Look at the USA today, where socialist sympathy is strongest and where capitalist sympathy is strongest. Where? https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1gl630u/a_mostly_complete_map_of_counties_in_the_2024/ Rather than getting caught up in personalities and parties, the general message is that the blue areas are densely populated urban areas and the red is sparsely populated rural farming areas. The mostly red map represents a nearly balanced red vs blue. Note there are no personalities needed to explain any of this, only population densities. States without huge dominating cities vote red. Otherwise, blue. Blue is now embracing socialism. Hasan Piker (referenced previously) is the new blue. Poland?s farming population realized they are the ones who produce the actual food. They flexed their muscle, and rejected socialism. Ukraine appears to be currently going the same way as their neighbor to the north (we didn?t visit Ukraine.) Poland was so encouraging. The remaining scars of communism were there, but the place was jumping. It is modern, clean, felt safe everywhere we went, open minded to yanks, building everywhere, willing to share their experiences. Great place. They had a dose of capitalism and declared it good. I too embrace capitalism. I am with Poland, with US agricultural interests. Food production is good, capitalism is good. It leads to prosperity for the whole country. The electoral college protects the minorities, those who live in the smaller states where food is produced. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8297 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 17:03:12 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 10:03:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >I have seen you post the quote many times about the constitution being just a piece of paper. >?Yes and I strongly stand by that statement. The constitution is only as strong as the people that enforce it, and enforcement is the job of the executive branch? Well, they are part of the enforcement. The executive branch commands the army, but in addition to that, and perhaps far more important, is the militia, which is not part of the government. This is good, for if the US government fails, the army fails. But the militia is still here. >?Do you disagree, do you really believe the constitution is conscious and has some mystical power to do things without the help of humans? John K Clark Niels Borr kept a horseshoe above his office door to bring him good luck. When questioned if the great scientist believed in superstition, he explained that the horseshoe brings good luck even to those who don?t believe in it. The US constitution protects even those who don?t believe in it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 17:15:14 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:15:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0$37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 12:32?PM wrote: > *> * *The EC protects the people who live in the smaller states. **They > are in the minority. * > > *In 2020 in California more people voted for Trump then** Texans voted for Trump, but the California Trump voters were still in the minority so over 6 million of them received exactly ZERO votes in the electoral college; where was their protection? * * > I support protecting minorities.* * I think my minorities should have equal rights but you go further than that, you think they should have superior rights, you must be the most woke DEI* *loving ultra liberal around?!* *John K Clark* > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 17:27:24 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 10:27:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0 $37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <00ea01dd2da4$81312130$83936390$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 12:32?PM > wrote: >>? The EC protects the people who live in the smaller states. They are in the minority. >..In 2020 in California more people voted for Trump then Texans voted for Trump? This we do not know, for California has legal ballot harvesting. In the most populous state in the union it is legal to ?collect? ballots. Consequence, we do not know what was the popular vote here, consequently we do not know what is the popular vote in the USA. >? the California Trump voters were still in the minority so over 6 million of them received exactly ZERO votes in the electoral college; where was their protection? Recognizing this, many fled to new homes in Florida and Texas. Roll out the welcome mat, for your state may now get more representatives in the electoral college. > I support protecting minorities. >? you must be the most woke DEI loving ultra liberal around?! John K Clark I am told this a lot. But I don?t think I hold the record for it. I am socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. Those views are perfectly compatible, if one recognizes it applies at the federal level, and that the heavy lifting of government should occur at the state level. Individual voters exercise greater control of state governments. If they don?t like the way it is going, they have 49 other choices, no immigration restrictions at all. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 17:34:42 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:34:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The U.S. Military Wants A.I. Dominance. Feuds and China May Thwart It. Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. The U.S. Military Wants A.I. Dominance. Feuds and China May Thwart It. The administration is veering wildly in its response to the national security implications of A.I. as China, America?s main technological and military rival, charges ahead. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/16/us/politics/military-ai-china-anthropic.html?unlocked_article_code=1.51A.TAAG.vrrm4G5h74Or&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Sun Aug 16 21:34:06 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 14:34:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <00ea01dd2da4$81312130$83936390$@rainier66.com> References: <001401dd2540$68f14580$3ad3d080$@rainier66.com> <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2989$50013e20$f003ba60$@rainier66.com> <027601dd2997$b735f4b0$25a1de10$@rainier66.com> <004901dd2c1b$67fc25a0 $37f470e0$@rainier66.com> <004d01dd2c2c$7c066540$74132fc0$@rainier66.com> <006201dd2ccd$a6f9a7c0$f4ecf740$@rainier66.com> <005001dd2ced$3a7b66e0$af7234a0$@rainier66.com> <003601dd2d76$d4bd9cd0$7e38d670$@rainier66.com> <008801dd2d86$5714ee40$053ecac0$@rainier66.com> <007401dd2d9c$ddd736c0$9985a440$@rainier66.com> <00ea01dd2da4$81312130$83936390$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <017401dd2dc6$f7abaa20$e702fe60$@rainier66.com> From: spike at rainier66.com ? >?Recognizing this, many fled to new homes in Florida and Texas. Roll out the welcome mat, for your state may now get more representatives in the electoral college? spike At the 7:44 mark, this entertaining YouTube commentator observes that JP Morgan Chase now employs more people in Texas than in New York. https://youtu.be/tCjD-rgod1M I have long considered it a bad idea to have a really big city with the same name as the state, for not everyone says New York City. So now I don?t know if he meant more Texas JP Morganers in Texas than in New York City or in New York state. This leads to the question: if the New York Stock Exchange migrates out of the city and state, will it become the Dallas Stock Exchange or the Texas Stock Exchange? Along those lines we saw Starbucks HQ leave Seattle for lower priced and lower tax office space in Tennessee. Since cost savings are important in the high-priced coffee market, their direct competitors will likely need to follow, but if so, will they need to change their name to Nashville?s Best Coffee? The mind boggles. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at protonmail.com Mon Aug 17 04:01:06 2026 From: sjatkins at protonmail.com (sjatkins) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 04:01:06 +0000 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: References: <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <3vhcpKjPCovtaohMEIiLpZ5PQhLi00G4Y58M_NPfPCFCtk_5eSRba3eW0d80uWl1deLyDtV-6jmw8cvdjjIWe4fCYZech1mgVqBRrhGhO1o=@protonmail.com> If that is so then why was it people were getting censored left and right including major professionals.? I heard Fauci make lots of pronouncements about "the Science" supporting whatever was the claim that month.? Much of it later rescinded.? I don't think it washes to say he didn't enable a lot of political games.? ? He was deeply involved in gain of function research.? He knew that such research was done on exactly that sort of virus family and even written up in 2015. It was done in North Carolina before such research was seen as too risky and shutdown in the US. A major contributor was a Wuhan.? ?There was no way he didn't know it was a very serious possibility and more likely than some natural mutation animal model.? I won't forgive him for going out of his way to shutdown and make fun of all early treatment protocols that seemed to have some promise clinically.? That costs lives. I don't forgive locking down the country either.? For nearly a century that had not been considered at all the right thing to do in face of pandemic.? It adds panic, depression, major economic damage to the pandemic itself. And there is not evidence it works well enough to offset the many problems.? It was the greatest loss of freedom for most American in American history.? It did huge and unnecessary damage.? It is high time it was questioned and looked into.? ?That is much better than the default Stockholm Syndrome behavior or just trying to believe it was all on the up and up and necessary.? Wanting to forget and not see it in a darker way is understandable.? But it makes the next worse imposition of major restrictions on freedom easier and more likely to be accepted since "after all we survived the late one".?? - samantha On Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 at 07:05, John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 12:21?PM wrote: > > > > > Since you bring up conspiracy theories, what about that one suggesting that Dr. Fauci covered up aspects of the origin of covid, then claimed there was scientific consensus that it was natural origin, while there was still plenty of dissent in the scientific community? > > > Dr. Fauci never claimed that. In March of 2020, just 2 months after COVID was first discovered when very little was known about it, he did said there was very strong evidence that the origin of Covid came from a jump between animals and humans; but only a few months later, when more evidence came in, he said there was probably a natural origin for Covid but he remained "open minded" about it and a lab leak was a plausible hypothesis that could not be ruled out. Even today there is still no scientific consensus about the origins of Covid. And I find it difficult to believe your outrage over Dr. Fauci allegedly telling a lie is genuine when your buddy, He Who Must Not Be Named, has told THOUSANDS of bald-faced lies to the American public, and unlike Dr. Fauci POTUS has never once corrected himself. > > > I'm not saying the man was perfect, Dr. Fauci certainly made mistakes but he was fighting a virus unlike anything seen before that would end up killing more Americans in just 18 months than all the wars the US has fought over the last 250 years PUT TOGETHER. So of course he made mistakes, so has every general who has ever fought a war, but I don't think there are many who could've done better than Dr. Fauci. > > You prefer Covid to have come from a lab leak because you hate China. I prefer Covid not to have come from a lab leak because I love laboratory research. But neither of our preferences have any bearing on the fact that Covid either came from a lab leak or it did not, and no matter how frustrating it may be, we're just not gonna know the full truth until more information becomes available. > > > I also think it's interesting that Senator Rand Paul, the guy who orchestrated the Dr. Fauci witch hunt, at one time called himself a "libertarian" and had a political reputation as a staunch advocate of privacy rights and was a vocal critic of federal surveillance, but he somehow got a hold of Dr. Fauci's personal diary and quickly made all of it public. Yes there were some embarrassing things in that diary, but if I was an 80 year old man who kept a diary and I met a beautiful movie star who kept telling me how brilliant I was, I would certainly write a few lines about that in my personal diary, and I'll bet you would do the same thing. But neither of us would want what we had written to be made public. So if I was forced to testify before that stupid committee and demanded an explanation for every line I had written in my diary then I would have told that hypocritical son of a bitch I was taking the fifth amendment too. > > John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 343 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 17 05:22:42 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 22:22:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi In-Reply-To: <3vhcpKjPCovtaohMEIiLpZ5PQhLi00G4Y58M_NPfPCFCtk_5eSRba3eW0d80uWl1deLyDtV-6jmw8cvdjjIWe4fCYZech1mgVqBRrhGhO1o=@protonmail.com> References: <006a01dd2561$a28f5220$e7adf660$@rainier66.com> <00e301dd2684$71011da0$530358e0$@rainier66.com> <017401dd2751$f356f720$da04e560$@rainier66.com> <3vhcpKjPCovtaohMEIiLpZ5PQhLi00G4Y58M_NPfPCFCtk_5eSRba3eW0d80uWl1deLyDtV-6jmw8cvdjjIWe4fCYZech1mgVqBRrhGhO1o=@protonmail.com> Message-ID: <005e01dd2e08$6e671b90$4b3552b0$@rainier66.com> From: sjatkins Subject: Re: [ExI] conspiracy theories, was: RE: Satoshi >?If that is so then why was it people were getting censored left and right including major professionals. I heard Fauci make lots of pronouncements about "the Science" supporting whatever was the claim that month. Much of it later rescinded. I don't think it washes to say he didn't enable a lot of political games. He was deeply involved in gain of function research. He knew that such research was done on exactly that sort of virus family and even written up in 2015. It was done in North Carolina before such research was seen as too risky and shutdown in the US. A major contributor was a Wuhan. There was no way he didn't know it was a very serious possibility and more likely than some natural mutation animal model. I won't forgive him for going out of his way to shutdown and make fun of all early treatment protocols that seemed to have some promise clinically. That costs lives. I don't forgive locking down the country either. For nearly a century that had not been considered at all the right thing to do in face of pandemic. It adds panic, depression, major economic damage to the pandemic itself. And there is not evidence it works well enough to offset the many problems. It was the greatest loss of freedom for most American in American history. It did huge and unnecessary damage. It is high time it was questioned and looked into. That is much better than the default Stockholm Syndrome behavior or just trying to believe it was all on the up and up and necessary. Wanting to forget and not see it in a darker way is understandable. But it makes the next worse imposition of major restrictions on freedom easier and more likely to be accepted since "after all we survived the late one". * samantha Samantha! Why the heck don?t you post here more often please? You are among friends here. Your post is right on. There was a very severe cost in the extreme actions of shutting down schools, when we already knew that covid was nothing for kids. I don?t know why covid was that way: for old people it was really bad, for kids it was almost nothing. I was involved with the local school at the time. I was helping coach competition math, helping with Science Olympiad, generally volunteering with the smart ones. I am not pretending it was as much a community service as helping the academically needy: it isn?t. Working with the smart ones is a lotta fun, very rewarding. I only worked with the smart ones. My observation: during that shutdown, the social cost to the students was enormous. But there was another very obvious observation: the academically poor got poorer, the academically rich got waaaaaay the hell richer. The ones who took advantage of online resources took off like a Falcon Heavy. About 10% of the students never logged on. So they had about 16 months out of school. We had to arrange to pass them somehow, even though they were waaaaay behind. We are still dealing with that at the high school. The authors of the Great Barrington Declaration had it mostly right. But they were vilified, their reputations damaged. The cost of the shutdown was very high. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 11:39:50 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 07:39:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 1:03?PM wrote: > *>>>**I have seen you post the quote many times about the constitution >>>> being just a piece of paper.* >>> >>> > >> *>>?Yes and I strongly stand by that statement. The constitution is only >> as strong as the people that enforce it, and enforcement is the job of the >> executive branch?* > > > > *> Well, they are part of the enforcement. The executive branch commands > the army,* > *The Executive Branch also commands the Justice Department which decides who to prosecute and who not to, and the IRS **which decides who to audit and who not to, **and the FBI, and the US Marshals, and the DEA, and the ATF, and the CIA, and Trump's ICE thugs. At one time all these organizations were admirable but King Donald The First turned them into parodies of their former selves by filling them with **his own personal yes men who have loyalty only to their king and NOT to the constitution. * *The only ray of hope is that these yes men are also incredibly incompetent because the only attribute King Donald is interested in is blind loyalty, the result is these yes men tend to come from places like Fox News and are** not very bright and know almost nothing about the organizations they're supposed to lead. If they were competent the USA would've become a totalitarian state years ago. * * > but in addition to that, and perhaps far more important, is the > militia, which is not part of the government. This is good, for if the US > government fails, the army fails. But the militia is still here.* > *I wish you were joking but I know you are not. * *> The US constitution protects even those who don?t believe in it.* > *I don't believe in magic. You can't take liberty for granted, it takes effort to preserve freedom and unfortunately in the USA there is very little of it. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 17 12:55:24 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 05:55:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? > but in addition to that, and perhaps far more important, is the militia, which is not part of the government. This is good, for if the US government fails, the army fails. But the militia is still here. >?I wish you were joking but I know you are not. ? I could have worded it better. It isn?t that the military fails. It is that the government fails to pay the military. They must be paid. The militia is us. We are not professional soldiers. But the militia was established by the founders in case they couldn?t pay professional soldiers, which turns out in the case of Washington?s men, they couldn?t. Well? we now have a national debt which is so large, the government cannot even cover the interest without borrowing more. > The US constitution protects even those who don?t believe in it. >?I don't believe in magic?. I don?t either, which is why I don?t have a horseshoe. But I believe in the constitution. >? You can't take liberty for granted? I don?t. >?it takes effort to preserve freedom and unfortunately in the USA there is very little of it. John K Clark So vote for candidates who promote freedom. That includes both personal freedom and economic freedom. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 13:07:10 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 09:07:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 8:56?AM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > So vote for candidates who promote freedom. That includes both personal freedom and economic freedom. Note: "promote", not just "promise". Looking at deeds rather than words, that would lead one to vote straight-ticket Democratic (or, where Democrats aren't even on the ballot, at least anyone other than Republican) in most US federal elections for at least the next few years, no matter how awful or evil one otherwise thinks any individual Democratic candidate is. (There are a few exceptions, but they are rare - and often have been chased off the ballot because they put loyalty to the country over loyalty to Trump.) From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 13:24:33 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 09:24:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 8:55?AM wrote: > *>>?it takes effort to preserve freedom and unfortunately in the USA there >> is very little of it. * *John K Clark* > > > > *>So vote for candidates who promote freedom. * > *I do. You don't. * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 17 19:14:25 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 12:14:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark >>?So vote for candidates who promote freedom. >?I do. You don't. John K Clark John this is a puzzling comment coming from one who openly opposes TwitterX, which is the world?s medium for free speech. TwitterX is our friend. Without it, we likely would not know of today?s bombshell revelation, which we are learning for the first time today: This leads to an obvious question: Why are we just now hearing of this? 27 May 2021 was over five years ago. Answer: it was intentionally squelched. We are only given part of the story. We were not prepared, and this problem has come back to bite us. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 76674 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Mon Aug 17 21:44:48 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 14:44:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <016701dd2e91$a0dc2320$e2946960$@rainier66.com> From: spike at rainier66.com Subject: RE: etymology of just a piece of paper From: John Clark > ? >>> but in addition to that, and perhaps far more important, is the militia, which is not part of the government. This is good, for if the US government fails, the army fails. But the militia is still here. >>?I wish you were joking but I know you are not. ? >?I could have worded it better. It isn?t that the military fails. It is that the government fails to pay the military. They must be paid? spike Consider the current situation in light of the risk that AI doesn?t kill us all. (If it does, then don?t worry about the following.) The Japanese yen is falling against the dollar, which means we can buy Japanese cars for less money and all, however? it carries a big risk: If Japan?s situation gets sufficiently dire, it starts dumping US debt, which drives US currency down with the yen. If FRNs (dollars) begin to drop, the Federal Reserve will be unable to sell the bonds needed for the US government to borrow the money it needs to pay interest on the money it has already borrowed, and the money it needs to borrow to pay its current expenses, along with the new interest for the current borrowing. If the federal government cannot borrow, it would demonstrate that the deplorable Elon Musk was right all along: the federal budget must balance. Can?t have that, now can we? If the federal government cannot borrow, it may try to make up the difference by increasing taxes, which will demonstrate the Laffer Curve, which always gets the last laff. Then the federal government will no longer be able to pay the military. Then the militia is all that is left to defend the nation, which is why the second amendment is there to start with. This would be horrifying of course, but we might not need to worry about it: AI might destroy us before that scenario can play out. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 11:07:22 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:07:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] What Ancient Civilizations actually looked like Message-ID: This website has used AI to create videos of three ancient civilizations as they actually looked before they went extinct. Impressive! The videos are about 25 minutes each. How Mayan Mega Cities Actually Looked: Maya Civilization. How Mesopotamia's Megastructures Actually Looked: Sumer, Babylon, Akkad. How Ancient Egypt's Megastructures Actually Looked. BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 11:49:25 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 07:49:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 3:14?PM wrote: >>>?So vote for candidates who promote freedom. >> >> *>>?I do. You don't. * > > > *> John this is a puzzling comment coming from one who openly opposes > TwitterX,* > *I'm not saying people shouldn't be free to use TwitterX, I'm saying it would not be wise to use TwitterX for anything other than light entertainment. Very light. * * > which is the world?s medium for free speech. * > *So is the wall of a stall in a public bathroom, and both are full of shit; a good example of that would be the following.* *> TwitterX is our friend. Without it, we likely would not know of today?s > bombshell revelation, which we are learning for the first time today:* > > > *Bombshell? More like a wet firecracker. What did you expect? Never in the history of the US has a major new drug vaccine or medical procedure been approved without somebody talking about hypothetical negative side effects. * *> This leads to an obvious question: Why are we just now hearing of this? * > *Because there was nothing new in it and something needs to be new and or unusual for it to be considered news. That's the reason why neither CNN nor Fox interrupts their programming with special reports saying that a fully loaded 747 landed perfectly safely at Heathrow airport after encountering no problems whatsoever. * > *> 27 May 2021 was over five years ago.* > *Yes, we know a lot more about Covid and the vaccine than we did five years ago so today it's even clearer than it was then that the risk of taking the Covid vaccine is tiny compared to the HUGE risk of not taking the Covid vaccine.* *Now here is something that was only posted 20 hours ago that may or may not turn out to be a bombshell, it will take time to know if it is but it won't take five years. * *People vaccinated with the mRNA Covid vaccine that had melanoma, lung or brain cancer live twice as long as the unvaccinated * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 76674 bytes Desc: not available URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 12:03:13 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:03:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A New Level of Trumpian Evil Message-ID: *POTUS depletes our military resources in his idiotic war with Iran while ignoring the danger that China poses to South Korea and Taiwan, both key players in the AI race. **Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman wrote the following today: * *A New Level of Trumpian Evil* John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis yh8 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 12:37:01 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:37:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 1:27?PM wrote: *>..In 2020 in California more people vote**d* >> * for Trump then Texans voted for Trump?* > > > *> This we do not know, for California has legal ballot harvesting. In > the most populous state in the union it is legal to ?collect? ballots. > Consequence, we do not know what was the popular vote here, consequently we > do not know what is the popular vote in the USA. * > *I gave the following question to Grok, an AI run by some woke ultra left wing guy named Elon Musk. * *ME: * *I told a friend that In 2020 in California more people voted for Trump then Texans voted for Trump but he said "This we do not know, for California has legal ballot harvesting. In the most populous state in the union it is legal to ?collect? ballots. Consequently, we do not know what the popular vote in California was, so we do not know what is the popular vote in the USA." * *Is that true?* *GROK: " No, that claim is not true.* Ballot harvesting (more accurately, third-party ballot collection or return) is legal in California, but it does not mean the popular vote totals are unknown or unverifiable. Official certified results exist for California and the United States, and they show Trump receiving more votes in California than in Texas. California?s rules on third-party ballot return Since 2016 (Assembly Bill 1921), California law has allowed any person to return a completed vote-by-mail ballot on behalf of a voter. This practice is sometimes called ?ballot harvesting.? It is legal and regulated in California (and permitted with varying restrictions in other states). Critics argue it weakens chain-of-custody protections and creates opportunities for pressure or fraud; supporters say it increases access for voters who have difficulty returning ballots themselves. *There have been no widespread, credible findings of systematic illegal alteration or substitution of ballots via this method that would invalidate California?s 2020 totals*. Isolated concerns, lawsuits, and observer reports exist, but they have not overturned or rendered the official results unknowable. Official 2020 results - *California*: Trump received approximately 6,006,429 votes (about 34.3%). Biden received about 11,110,250 (about 63.5%). These are the certified figures from the California Secretary of State and widely reported sources. - *Texas*: Trump received approximately 5,890,347?5,890,428 votes (about 52%). Biden received about 5,259,000. Trump?s California total exceeded his Texas total by roughly 100,000?116,000 votes. California is far more populous, so higher absolute Republican votes there (even in a loss) are unsurprising and consistent with prior elections. Why the popular vote is not ?unknown? California conducted the election under its laws, including universal vote-by-mail in 2020 (ballots mailed to all active registered voters), signature verification on returned envelopes, tracking systems (such as BallotTrax), and official drop-off options. Results were canvassed, certified by the Secretary of State, and accepted for the Electoral College. The same certified state totals form the basis of the national popular vote. Legal third-party return does not erase the recorded, counted, and certified ballots. Concerns about election integrity, signature matching standards, voter-roll maintenance, or the wisdom of unrestricted third-party collection are legitimate topics of debate and policy disagreement. Some analyses and lawsuits have raised specific issues in California. However, those *concerns do not support the stronger claim that ?we do not know? the popular vote in California or the United States*. The official, certified numbers are public and show more Trump votes in California than in Texas." * John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 13:20:07 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 09:20:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Trump=E2=80=99s_Broken_Promises=2C_in_11_Charts?= Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Trump?s Broken Promises, in 11 Charts The president likes to boast about the ?greatest economy we?ve ever had.? His record falls far short. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/08/18/opinion/trump-economy-campaign-promises.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6VA.RzdV.gmr3rpYL3JBy&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 13:54:14 2026 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 14:54:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] YouTuber builds a giant model aircraft with ring-shaped wings Message-ID: YouTuber turns childhood idea into a giant aircraft with ring-shaped wings A childhood paper plane inspired him to build a giant circular-wing aircraft. By Atharva Gosavi Aug 18, 2026 Quote: British YouTuber James Whomsley has built and flown a giant radio-controlled aircraft fitted with circular wings, testing whether the unconventional configuration could perform better than traditional straight wings. Circular wings produce lift using the same broad principle as conventional airfoils. When the ring moves through the air at an angle of attack, pressure differences between its upper and lower surfaces generate lift. -------------------------- The 24-minute video is worth a watch. Rather fascinating, from an aeronautics point of view. BillK From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 15:10:32 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:10:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark ? > John this is a puzzling comment coming from one who openly opposes TwitterX, >?I'm not saying people shouldn't be free to use TwitterX, I'm saying it would not be wise to use TwitterX for anything other than light entertainment. Very light. ? Ja, the Woodcock memo revealing that she has been getting warnings from healthcare professionals about adverse reactions to the covid vaccine, very light entertainment indeed. But if light entertainment is the source of what might be an important signal, so be it. > which is the world?s medium for free speech. So is the wall of a stall in a public bathroom, and both are full of shit; a good example of that would be the following? I see, so your theory is to label anyone who opposed or even asks questions about your totalitarian approach to a medical treatment is full of shit. Opposition is heresy. Thanks for clarifying that stance. >?Bombshell? More like a wet firecracker. What did you expect? Never in the history of the US has a major new drug vaccine or medical procedure been approved without somebody talking about hypothetical negative side effects?. This one was different in two ways: anyone talking about negative side effects was given the kind of response that you are doing right now. The second way it is different is that Woodcock isn?t talking about hypothetical negative side effects, she is referring to healthcare professionals who she knows personally who are contacting her, reporting having observed adverse events post vaccination in their own patients. Sure we can?t prove causation from correlation, we know. And we can actively prevent documenting the cases, for in science if an event is not documented, it never happened. We know. The best way to prevent adverse events was to prevent them from being documented. > This leads to an obvious question: Why are we just now hearing of this? >?Because there was nothing new in it?. Nothing new. Heh. Many of us know people who experienced adverse events, but noted that with all the systems in place to detect the phenomenon, The Science declared the vaccines safe. Woodcock?s comment damn sure is new to me. > 27 May 2021 was over five years ago. >?Yes, we know a lot more about Covid and the vaccine than we did five years ago so today it's even clearer than it was then that the risk of taking the Covid vaccine is tiny compared to the HUGE risk of not taking the Covid vaccine? That?s a different argument from the one used to demand that minors take the vaccine. We already knew by the time the vaccine was available that covid was very low risk to them. It made the rounds in the schools, but none of the students were made seriously ill by it. For reasons we still don?t understand, there was a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in young people who took the vaccine. And yet, the young were the ones who were subject to the most pressure: they were excluded from school events if they were unvaccinated. Businesses pressured employees to get the vaccine, but they didn?t have the kind of leverage the schools had with students. Businesses knew if they compelled employees to be vaccinated, then subsequently the employee had an adverse reaction, the company would be sued to the cufflinks. Schools didn?t need to worry about that. One of the interesting early observations is that if students did have adverse reactions to the vaccine, it was to the second injection rather than the first. Yet most of the hypothetical protection was from the first injection. Optimal solution: take only one. School activities directors who excluded the unvaccinated included those students who had only one vaccination. So? once the students understood that, many of them took only one of the injections. Well OK then. By that reasoning, why not split the vaccine into four parts, note efficacy and adverse effects after each of the four injections? And if that works, why not split it into eight? Reasoning: we learned after the fact that what we were told was a vaccine was really immunotherapy: it aided the immune system temporarily but did not produce long term immunity. Well OK, no problem, take the dose which was intended to last a year, break it into 52 doses and take one a week. Use epipens, so the patient injects themself, for convenience and cost savings. >?People vaccinated with the mRNA Covid vaccine that had melanoma, lung or brain cancer live twice as long as the unvaccinated John K Clark Excellent news is this. Having lost a friend recently to melanoma, this has my attention. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 36677 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 15:27:33 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:27:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 1:27?PM > wrote: >..In 2020 in California more people voted for Trump then Texans voted for Trump?John > This we do not know, for California has legal ballot harvesting. In the most populous state in the union it is legal to ?collect? ballots. Consequence, we do not know what was the popular vote here, consequently we do not know what is the popular vote in the USA? spike >?I gave the following question to Grok?John K Clark Heh. John, Grok does not go about witnessing large numbers of homeless people. I see them every day. Anyone can register voters, with a signature, with or without an actual home, for a home is not required to vote in California, nor is photo ID, nor proof of citizenship. One can have a mailing address without a home or legal citizenship (a post office box for instance.) Several people can share a post office box. Mail-in balloting makes it so easy: register arbitrary numbers of people, with a verifiable signature but without legal voting rights, collect the ballots when they arrive, go get the signatures on them, fill out the choices at their leisure, drop them in the mailbox. Result: we don?t know what is the popular vote in the most populated state in the union, nor we know what is the popular vote at the national level, because of California?s policy on legal ballot harvesting. We can claim all we want that this obvious approach to stealing elections does not occur, but never do we see actual proof that it doesn?t. We have never seen proof that a voting machine can?t be hacked and cannot malfunction, as it appears was the case last week in a Michigan primary, specifically in Detroit. (Countdown to someone pointing out that you can never prove a negative: five?four? three?) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 16:01:53 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:01:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:28?AM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat > Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX > On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 1:27?PM wrote: > >..In 2020 in California more people voted for Trump then Texans voted for Trump?John > > > This we do not know, for California has legal ballot harvesting. In the most populous state in the union it is legal to ?collect? ballots. Consequence, we do not know what was the popular vote here, consequently we do not know what is the popular vote in the USA? spike > > >?I gave the following question to Grok?John K Clark > > Heh. John, Grok does not go about witnessing large numbers of homeless people. I see them every day. Anyone can register voters, with a signature, with or without an actual home, for a home is not required to vote in California A mailing address is not a precondition of voting. A mailing address is not required to make sure that someone is not pretending to be multiple people so as to vote multiple times, nor is it required to confirm the person is a US citizen and thus entitled to vote. California has ways to make sure that the homeless can't vote multiple times in a single election. Look them up if you're curious. Unless you mean to imply that homeless people should have zero vote. That opinion would be in direct contradiction to the US Constitution as currently amended. California is not legally allowed to override the US Constitution, so it must give even homeless citizens the opportunity to vote. From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 16:16:13 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:16:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud Message-ID: Posting here because I think Spike will have opinions on this. I also wonder how and if AIs might help with the main problem: getting detectors that can do the job to where they are needed. (More sophisticated analysis doesn't matter if that analysis requires specialized anything that's too expensive, immobile, or unwieldy to get to the fake honey in the first place.) https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/the-sticky-problem-of-detecting-fake-honey/4023882.article From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 16:52:10 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 09:52:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> ...> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Cc: Adrian Tymes Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud Posting here because I think Spike will have opinions on this. I also wonder how and if AIs might help with the main problem: getting detectors that can do the job to where they are needed. (More sophisticated analysis doesn't matter if that analysis requires specialized anything that's too expensive, immobile, or unwieldy to get to the fake honey in the first place.) https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/the-sticky-problem-of-detecting-fake -honey/4023882.article _______________________________________________ Thanks Adrian! They start out with the comment "Nobody knows how much of the honey we buy is pure or unadulterated, as detecting fraud remains surprisingly difficult." That sentence is fighting itself, for fraud is bad, but impure adulterated honey is good: it reduces (or possibly eliminates) having to rob and plunder perfectly innocent bees. And of course it is hard to detect: unscrupulous agents take pure honey from the bees, that life-giving storage medium for nutrition, then substitute corn syrup to keep the bees alive over the winter. Unethical! Immoral I say! The bees worked so damn hard for that honey, so we humans aughta keep our damn paws out of it, and give OURSELVES the corn syrup, perhaps in a honey bear plastic bottle if it makes us feel better (I damn well AUGHTA make us feel WORSE for taking that honey.) Bee honey isn't really more healthy either. Nutritionally honey and corn syrup are practically indistinguishable to our digestive system, but apparently there are subtle differences to the bees' digestion and nutritional needs. The substitution of corn syrup to feed bees is thought to have contributed to the ruinous varroa mites in the 1970s, causing damage to the industry which is with us to this day. That bees' nutritional needs differ from our own should come as no surprise: feeding royal jelly to a bee larva turns her into a queen. Feed royal jelly to a human devourer, no visible benefit at all. I had an idea however. I work with scouts and we have some new families who are observant Jains, very strict vegans. Honey is an animal product (note that I have no heartburn at all with humans devouring animals and animal products, only honey.) Well OK then. Scouts go on camping trips, and camping trips demand smores, which are made with graham crackers, which are made with... honey. We don't want our Jain scouts left out, so I went in search of honey-free graham crackers, only to find that pretty much ALL graham crackers list honey in the ingredients, not just Honeymaid. Damn. Then I discovered... chocolate covered graham-cracker-like confections that are the functional equivalent of graham crackers, and well hell, you put chocolate on them anyway when you make smores, so why not start with some on there already? I have yet to hear a scout complain that his smores have too much chocolate. I have heard scout leaders complain that scouts devoured too much chocolate and now they are bouncing around like hyperactive hummingbirds, but the scouts don't mind it. Because of family obligations, I have missed the last three scout campouts, so I am suffering smore withdrawal. Fortunately I have some honey-less chocolate graham crackers (although not a Jain, you know I am a hard-ass honey abstainer) and I have some marshmallows and some chocolate bars left over from last time, along with a webber grill and some sticks. Smore time! I do urge you to think of honey as artificial corn syrup/molasses/food coloring, for those three ingredients are "natural" once you recognize that humans are natural and everything we do is "natural" in the sense that we evolved from natural forces. Hell artificial intelligence, nuclear bombs and covid-19 are natural, if viewed that perfectly natural way. Adrian, thanks for reinforcing my attitude. Eat corn syrup, alla yas! It comes from corn. spike From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 16:55:29 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:55:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 12:52?PM wrote: > Nutritionally honey and corn > syrup are practically indistinguishable to our digestive system I know someone who is allergic to corn syrup but not honey. She would disagree with your statement as if her life depended on it (which it kind of does, whenever she eats honey). From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 17:05:25 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 10:05:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat ... >...A mailing address is not a precondition of voting.... Agreed. >...A mailing address is not required to make sure that someone is not pretending to be multiple people so as to vote multiple times, nor is it required to confirm the person is a US citizen and thus entitled to vote... Agreed. >...California has ways to make sure that the homeless can't vote multiple times in a single election. Look them up if you're curious. _______________________________________________ Agree with almost all. California has ways to make sure homeless people can't vote multiple times in a single election. It isn't clear that it actually uses any of them, or if they do, why we see odd outcomes like the recent primary for LA mayor. Turns out voter verification really isn't necessary in California, for it is functionally a single party state. But what if... what if a measure is on the ballot to charge billionaires a one-time 5% tax on their net worth. As it turns out, there is, Prop 40. What if... suddenly and inexplicably in say 2028... millions of new California voters are registered, to post office boxes, with verifiable signatures, since they match exactly with the registration forms... and most of the new votes are for a party which scarcely exists in California. Imagine there are so many of these new votes that 54 electoral college votes move from this column to that column, and it reverses the outcome of the election. The guy who was urging a national-level 5% one time tax on billionaires loses. Most of the California congressional seats change hands, which completely changes the balance of power in the House. Every Californian realizes they are now equivalent to the Florida resident, a microMAGA. Oh, but such a thing could never happen! Unless billionaires put up a lot of money for some reason, such as to defeat a national billionaire tax. spike From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 17:09:41 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 13:09:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:05?PM wrote: > What if... suddenly and inexplicably in say 2028... ...the same thing, more or less, happens in California as has been happening for a long time now, including the same negligible amount of vote fraud? That seems to be the truly unbelievable outcome to you. And yet, to most other people, it seems by far the most likely outcome. From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 17:11:11 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 10:11:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> ...> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Honey fraud On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 12:52?PM wrote: > Nutritionally honey and corn > syrup are practically indistinguishable to our digestive system >...I know someone who is allergic to corn syrup but not honey. She would disagree with your statement as if her life depended on it (which it kind of does, whenever she eats honey). _______________________________________________ Easy solution: leave off with all store-bought honey. She can't be sure there isn't corn syrup in it (but good chance there is (unless she has her own bees (I am perfectly OK with those who have their OWN hives (I used to (when I co-owned a farm (but I didn't take their honey (for having one's own hives increases the total population of bees (this is a good thing.))))) Adrian do urge your friend to get a hobby hive. They are not expensive, and the needle-ass bitches make entertaining pets. spike From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 17:14:49 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 10:14:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> ...> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Cc: Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:05?PM wrote: >>... What if... suddenly and inexplicably in say 2028... >...the same thing, more or less, happens in California as has been happening for a long time now, including the same negligible amount of vote fraud? That seems to be the truly unbelievable outcome to you. And yet, to most other people, it seems by far the most likely outcome. _______________________________________________ Prop 40, the billionaire tax Adrian. Had not Elon fled California, he was at risk of owing the state 50 billion dollars. One can buy a lot of signed voter registration forms for fifty billion dollars. spike From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 17:16:02 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 13:16:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:11?PM wrote: > Easy solution: leave off with all store-bought honey. And buy from specialty places? How can she be sure they aren't diluting either? > Adrian do urge your friend to get a hobby hive. They are not expensive, and the needle-ass bitches make entertaining pets. She's way too busy to tend to one. (She's my wife and trying to keep up with me - and succeeding well enough, enabling me to go further.) From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 17:19:17 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 13:19:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:14?PM wrote: > Prop 40, the billionaire tax Adrian. Had not Elon fled California, he was at risk of owing the state 50 billion dollars. One can buy a lot of signed voter registration forms for fifty billion dollars. 1) But he has, so he's no longer at that particular risk, no? 2) The remaining population in California that might be affected do not seem inclined toward massive voter registration. 3) The amount of unregistered homeless in California does not seem sufficient to defeat Prop. 40, even if literally all of them (of age to vote, and even if one ignores citizenship requirements) were registered and voted to defeat Prop. 40 as you suggest. From benzaiboc at proton.me Tue Aug 18 17:52:16 2026 From: benzaiboc at proton.me (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 17:52:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?World=E2=80=99s_first_nanofabricator_platform?= Message-ID: https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/worlds-first-nanofabricator-semiconductor-materials === Ben From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 18:15:51 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 11:15:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01a701dd2f3d$9a932cf0$cfb986d0$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 10:19 AM To: ExI chat list Cc: Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:14?PM wrote: > Prop 40, the billionaire tax Adrian. Had not Elon fled California, he was at risk of owing the state 50 billion dollars. One can buy a lot of signed voter registration forms for fifty billion dollars. 1) But he has, so he's no longer at that particular risk, no? 2) The remaining population in California that might be affected do not seem inclined toward massive voter registration. 3) The amount of unregistered homeless in California does not seem sufficient to defeat Prop. 40, even if literally all of them (of age to vote, and even if one ignores citizenship requirements) were registered and voted to defeat Prop. 40 as you suggest. _______________________________________________ 1) The current governor of California is a likely candidate for national office. He has specifically called for a national level 5% billionaire tax. Elon is of course at risk, as are all billionaires (and millionaires (and eventually thousandaires.)) 2) Irrelevant. If billionaires collectively start offering real money for signed voter applications, it will happen. 3) ...even if literally all of them... sure. But we don't know what literally all of them means, nor do we have any clear recourse if way more than literally all of them register to vote. How would we disprove those applications, if we can't find the people who filled them out? We have no mechanism for finding any particular homeless person. Where I was going with it: of all places to commit massive voter fraud, California is the best, better even than Michigan. In California we have arbitrarily large numbers of homeless people (because the climate is mild enough here one can live outdoors indefinitely (and the charity infrastructure is sufficient to support that lifestyle.)) Nobody worries about it much because we have a one-party system. But... what if... that party unexpectedly loses? And it hands over all 54 EC votes, which reverses the election? Then what? What if... the governor says the election was obviously stolen and proposes sending the state's party's delegates, since everyone knows they really won. The resulting chaos would make 2000 look like a Presbyterian ministers' picnic. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 18:16:36 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 14:16:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:10?AM wrote: *>there was a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in young > people who took the vaccine* *The misinformation never ends! * *ME: Somebody told me that before the Covid vaccine was approved for wide scale use there was already a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in young people who took the vaccine. Is that true?* *GROK**: "No.* The elevated risk of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in young people?particularly adolescent and young adult males, most often after the second dose?was not known before the vaccines received emergency use authorization (EUA) for wide-scale use. It emerged as a post-authorization safety signal after millions of doses had already been administered. Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) received FDA EUA on December 11, 2020 (initially for ages ?16), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) on December 18, 2020 (for ages ?18). Clinical trial data supporting these authorizations *did not identify myocarditis or pericarditis as safety concerns*. The trials were large but still underpowered for very rare events, and no associated cases were reported in the pre-EUA clinical development for Moderna; similar findings held for Pfizer in the main adult trials. Reports of higher-than-expected myocarditis/pericarditis cases first appeared in early 2021 after widespread rollout: - Initial signals came from Israel (around February?April 2021, with investigation of cases in Pfizer recipients noted by April), the U.S. Department of Defense (military members), and other surveillance systems. - Broader recognition and investigation accelerated in May?June 2021 as more data accumulated from VAERS, other countries, and active surveillance. The CDC?s ACIP and FDA reviewed evidence showing a likely association, concentrated in younger males shortly after dose 2. - FDA *updated EUA fact sheets with warnings about myocarditis and pericarditis in late June 2021 (around June 24?25). CDC/ACIP affirmed that benefits still outweighed risks* in recommended populations while emphasizing awareness and monitoring. This timeline aligns with how rare adverse events are typically detected:* clinical trials catch common or moderately rare issues, but very rare ones (on the order of tens of cases per million doses in the highest-risk subgroups) often require large-scale post-authorization monitoring*. Subsequent observational studies confirmed an elevated risk relative to background rates, highest in males roughly 12?29 years old (especially after dose 2 of mRNA vaccines), *usually mild/resolving with supportive care* in most cases, though still a genuine and labeled risk. Note that ?endocarditis? (infection/inflammation of the heart valves/lining) is distinct and was not the primary signal; the documented association is with myocarditis and pericarditis. COVID-19 infection itself carries a substantially higher risk of myocarditis than vaccination in comparative data. In short, the claim that an elevated risk was already known *before* approval/EUA for wide-scale use is not supported by the regulatory and scientific record. The signal was identified and acted upon after rollout, leading to label updates and ongoing surveillance". * John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 18:32:15 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 11:32:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 11:17 AM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list ; Kelly Anderson Subject: Re: etymology of just a piece of paper On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:10?AM > wrote: >there was a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in young people who took the vaccine >?The misinformation never ends! ME: Somebody told me that before the Covid vaccine was approved for wide scale use there was already a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in young people who took the vaccine. Is that true? John you inserted the word ?already.? If you wish to use Grok as an arbiter of truth, just copy/paste exactly what I wrote. With the past tense ?was? I mean at the time Dr. Fauci received the memo from Janet Woodcock, which was well after they started giving the vaccine to young people, they had already observed adverse effects, and had noticed at the time what plenty of us heard: the first injection didn?t do anything bad. The second one did. Well OK then. Just take the first one and let it go. Perhaps the dosage is wrong. Or take the first one, wait six months, then take the second one. Or split the dose into smaller and more frequent doses. That approach makes the most sense from the theory of immune system response to mRNA: cut the dose into twelve and take them monthly. If the patient still experiences problems, cut the dose into 52 portions and take them weekly. If you wish to let Grok chew on that one, go ahead. But do be careful with quotes. spike GROK: "No. The elevated risk of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in young people?particularly adolescent and young adult males, most often after the second dose?was not known before the vaccines received emergency use authorization (EUA) for wide-scale use. It emerged as a post-authorization safety signal after millions of doses had already been administered. Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) received FDA EUA on December 11, 2020 (initially for ages ?16), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) on December 18, 2020 (for ages ?18). Clinical trial data supporting these authorizations did not identify myocarditis or pericarditis as safety concerns. The trials were large but still underpowered for very rare events, and no associated cases were reported in the pre-EUA clinical development for Moderna; similar findings held for Pfizer in the main adult trials. Reports of higher-than-expected myocarditis/pericarditis cases first appeared in early 2021 after widespread rollout: * Initial signals came from Israel (around February?April 2021, with investigation of cases in Pfizer recipients noted by April), the U.S. Department of Defense (military members), and other surveillance systems. * Broader recognition and investigation accelerated in May?June 2021 as more data accumulated from VAERS, other countries, and active surveillance. The CDC?s ACIP and FDA reviewed evidence showing a likely association, concentrated in younger males shortly after dose 2. * FDA updated EUA fact sheets with warnings about myocarditis and pericarditis in late June 2021 (around June 24?25). CDC/ACIP affirmed that benefits still outweighed risks in recommended populations while emphasizing awareness and monitoring. This timeline aligns with how rare adverse events are typically detected: clinical trials catch common or moderately rare issues, but very rare ones (on the order of tens of cases per million doses in the highest-risk subgroups) often require large-scale post-authorization monitoring. Subsequent observational studies confirmed an elevated risk relative to background rates, highest in males roughly 12?29 years old (especially after dose 2 of mRNA vaccines), usually mild/resolving with supportive care in most cases, though still a genuine and labeled risk. Note that ?endocarditis? (infection/inflammation of the heart valves/lining) is distinct and was not the primary signal; the documented association is with myocarditis and pericarditis. COVID-19 infection itself carries a substantially higher risk of myocarditis than vaccination in comparative data. In short, the claim that an elevated risk was already known before approval/EUA for wide-scale use is not supported by the regulatory and scientific record. The signal was identified and acted upon after rollout, leading to label updates and ongoing surveillance". John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 18:32:55 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 14:32:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <01a701dd2f3d$9a932cf0$cfb986d0$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> <01a701dd2f3d$9a932cf0$cfb986d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 2:15?PM wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 10:19 AM > To: ExI chat list > Cc: Adrian Tymes > Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:14?PM wrote: > > Prop 40, the billionaire tax Adrian. Had not Elon fled California, he was at risk of owing the state 50 billion dollars. One can buy a lot of signed voter registration forms for fifty billion dollars. > > 1) But he has, so he's no longer at that particular risk, no? > > 2) The remaining population in California that might be affected do not seem inclined toward massive voter registration. > > 3) The amount of unregistered homeless in California does not seem sufficient to defeat Prop. 40, even if literally all of them (of age to vote, and even if one ignores citizenship requirements) were registered and voted to defeat Prop. 40 as you suggest. > > _______________________________________________ > > 1) The current governor of California is a likely candidate for national office. He has specifically called for a national level 5% billionaire tax. Elon is of course at risk, as are all billionaires (and millionaires (and eventually thousandaires.)) Congress makes laws, not the President. The current governor of California can prefer such a law all he wants; without control of Congress, it won't happen. That aside, he'd be about as likely to advocate for it if he were to become President whether or not Prop. 40 passes. > 2) Irrelevant. If billionaires collectively start offering real money for signed voter applications, it will happen. Quite relevant. History - including the scale of what similar events have happened - suggests that the specific scenario you suggest won't happen at large enough scale to matter. > 3) ...even if literally all of them... sure. But we don't know what literally all of them means, Even if we don't know the exact count, we know it is not nearly enough to change the outcome. > nor do we have any clear recourse if way more than literally all of them register to vote. How would we disprove those applications, if we can't find the people who filled them out? We have no mechanism for finding any particular homeless person. Tossing people off of voter lists doesn't require finding them. There's been a long history of people being incorrectly tossed off of voter rolls without anyone bothering to confirm if they existed. Generally, in those cases, it is up to the individual to prove that they do exist. I mean, consider if the government said you didn't exist therefore you couldn't vote. You would do something about it, right? Same thing there. It's usually illegal to toss someone off the rolls who does exist, but it happens anyway. Those who enforce those particular laws are what keeps it from being widespread. From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 18:52:36 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 11:52:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <018801dd2f33$c3d22670$4b767350$@rainier66.com> <018c01dd2f35$13b90e50$3b2b2af0$@rainier66.com> <01a701dd2f3d$9a932cf0$cfb986d0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01ca01dd2f42$bc982ee0$35c88ca0$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat > _______________________________________________ > > 1) The current governor of California is a likely candidate for > national office. He has specifically called for a national level 5% > billionaire tax. Elon is of course at risk, as are all billionaires > (and millionaires (and eventually thousandaires.)) >...Congress makes laws, not the President. The current governor of California can prefer such a law all he wants; without control of Congress, it won't happen. That aside, he'd be about as likely to advocate for it if he were to become President whether or not Prop. 40 passes.... Ja of course. But what I meant is: what if the California guy lost the election because of odd looking results out of California, which also handed the other party iron grip control of both houses of congress. If there is sufficient money involved, signed vote applications will appear. It will not be clear which ones are bogus and which are real. As position and momentum are complementary properties for a particle, convenience and confidence are complementary in elections. As we make voting ever more convenient, we lose confidence in the outcome. After we saw what happened in the Los Angeles mayor race a few weeks ago and the Wisconsin governor primary last week (oops how could those five data cards be blank?) it is clear we have sacrificed confidence for convenience. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 19:10:01 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 15:10:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:27?AM wrote: > *> Heh. John, Grok does not go about witnessing large numbers of homeless > people.* > *It wasn't just Grok, and Gemini, and GPT, and Claude that concluded the election was fair, in 2020 King Donald lost 61 times in court when 61 federal judges, including many that the King himself had appointed, said (in polite legalese of course) that his claims the election was crooked was BULLSHIT. Spike, there has NEVER been an election that Trump was involved in that he didn't claim was crooked, he said the reason he didn't get an Emmy for his mindless TV game show was because the voting was crooked, and he won the 2016 election but he STILL claimed it was crooked because he didn't win in a landslide, and as far as he was concerned there is a law of physics that says there are only two ways any election can turn out:* *1) Him winning in a Republican landslide. * *2) A crooked election. * *If he was right then as president and the most powerful man in the world he had 4 years to fix things, but the Democrats STILL managed to outsmart him in 2020. King Donald must be incompetent and so stupid he couldn't pour the water out of a boot if the instructions were printed on the heel. But I have come to the conclusion that no new information and no rational argument could possibly convince you to deviate, even slightly, from official Trumpian ideology because you didn't use logic to form your opinion so logic can't be used to change it.* *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 19:21:40 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 15:21:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 2:32?PM wrote: *> the first injection didn?t do anything bad. The second one did.* *The probability of a teenager dying from Covid were very low, but the probability of a teenager dying from the Covid vaccine were even lower. That's why the recommendation that teenagers continue to receive the Covid shot did not change. It's a fact of life that Epidemiologists like Dr. Fauci need to constantly waigh one risk against another, it comes with the territory and can't be avoided. * *John K Clark* > > > > *From:* John Clark > *Sent:* Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 11:17 AM > *To:* spike at rainier66.com > *Cc:* ExI chat list ; Kelly Anderson < > postmowoods at gmail.com> > *Subject:* Re: etymology of just a piece of paper > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:10?AM wrote: > > > > *>**there was a known elevated risk of myocarditis and endocarditis in > young people who took the vaccine* > > > > *>?The misinformation* *never ends**!* > > > > *ME**: Somebody told me that before the Covid vaccine was approved for > wide scale use there was already a known elevated risk of myocarditis and > endocarditis in young people who took the vaccine. Is that true?* > > > > > > > > > > > > *John you inserted the word ?already.? If you wish to use Grok as an > arbiter of truth, just copy/paste exactly what I wrote. * > > > > *With the past tense ?was? I mean at the time Dr. Fauci received the memo > from Janet Woodcock, which was well after they started giving the vaccine > to young people, they had already observed adverse effects, and had noticed > at the time what plenty of us heard: the first injection didn?t do anything > bad. The second one did.* > > > > *Well OK then. Just take the first one and let it go. Perhaps the dosage > is wrong. Or take the first one, wait six months, then take the second > one. Or split the dose into smaller and more frequent doses. That > approach makes the most sense from the theory of immune system response to > mRNA: cut the dose into twelve and take them monthly. If the patient still > experiences problems, cut the dose into 52 portions and take them weekly. * > > > > *If you wish to let Grok chew on that one, go ahead. But do be careful > with quotes.* > > > > *spike* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *GROK**: "No.* The elevated risk of myocarditis (inflammation of the > heart muscle) and pericarditis associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in > young people?particularly adolescent and young adult males, most often > after the second dose?was not known before the vaccines received emergency > use authorization (EUA) for wide-scale use. It emerged as a > post-authorization safety signal after millions of doses had already been > administered. > > Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) received FDA EUA on December 11, 2020 > (initially for ages ?16), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) on December 18, 2020 (for > ages ?18). Clinical trial data supporting these authorizations *did not > identify myocarditis or pericarditis as safety concerns*. The trials were > large but still underpowered for very rare events, and no associated cases > were reported in the pre-EUA clinical development for Moderna; similar > findings held for Pfizer in the main adult trials. > > Reports of higher-than-expected myocarditis/pericarditis cases first > appeared in early 2021 after widespread rollout: > > - Initial signals came from Israel (around February?April 2021, with > investigation of cases in Pfizer recipients noted by April), the U.S. > Department of Defense (military members), and other surveillance systems. > - Broader recognition and investigation accelerated in May?June 2021 > as more data accumulated from VAERS, other countries, and active > surveillance. The CDC?s ACIP and FDA reviewed evidence showing a likely > association, concentrated in younger males shortly after dose 2. > - FDA *updated EUA fact sheets with warnings about myocarditis and > pericarditis in late June 2021 (around June 24?25). CDC/ACIP affirmed that > benefits still outweighed risks* in recommended populations while > emphasizing awareness and monitoring. > > This timeline aligns with how rare adverse events are typically detected:* > clinical trials catch common or moderately rare issues, but very rare ones > (on the order of tens of cases per million doses in the highest-risk > subgroups) often require large-scale post-authorization monitoring*. > Subsequent observational studies confirmed an elevated risk relative to > background rates, highest in males roughly 12?29 years old (especially > after dose 2 of mRNA vaccines), *usually mild/resolving with supportive > care* in most cases, though still a genuine and labeled risk. > > Note that ?endocarditis? (infection/inflammation of the heart > valves/lining) is distinct and was not the primary signal; the documented > association is with myocarditis and pericarditis. COVID-19 infection itself > carries a substantially higher risk of myocarditis than vaccination in > comparative data. > > In short, the claim that an elevated risk was already known *before* > approval/EUA for wide-scale use is not supported by the regulatory and > scientific record. The signal was identified and acted upon after rollout, > leading to label updates and ongoing surveillance". > > > > *John K Clark* > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 19:25:33 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:25:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01dc01dd2f47$57060a20$05121e60$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 12:10 PM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:27?AM > wrote: > Heh. John, Grok does not go about witnessing large numbers of homeless people. >?It wasn't just Grok, and Gemini, and GPT, and Claude that concluded the election was fair?John K Clark Firsthand witnesses all. John I was not referring to past elections, for that is not my concern, but rather to future ones. A proposal on the California ballot has motivated billionaires to dump huge sums into defeating a tax on their property. California already has a voter registration infrastructure that is not designed to deal with what happens when the state gets millions of new voter registration applications, then after the results come in, it appears they are bogus. What happens to all those votes? What if millions of applications come in registered for one party, then when returned they are straight party line for the other party? If that came to pass, I don?t know what would happen. Do you? Feel free to ask your favorite software, if you don?t mind gradually disappearing into AI. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 19:29:14 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:29:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 12:22 PM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list ; Kelly Anderson Subject: Re: etymology of just a piece of paper On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 2:32?PM > wrote: > the first injection didn?t do anything bad. The second one did. >?The probability of a teenager dying from Covid were very low, but the probability of a teenager dying from the Covid vaccine were even lower. That's why the recommendation that teenagers continue to receive the Covid shot did not change. It's a fact of life that Epidemiologists like Dr. Fauci need to constantly waigh one risk against another, it comes with the territory and can't be avoided. John K Clark Ja, so here?s a strategy: space the injections six months. Then both are functionally equivalent of a first injection. I am having a bit of heartburn trusting life and death decisions to a guy who pled the fifth over a hundred times, while holding a blanket pardon. He is refusing to answer on the risk of incriminating himself when he cannot be prosecuted. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 19:58:14 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 15:58:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] What if America Went Completely Dark? Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. What if America Went Completely Dark? The power grid relies on thousands of aging, hand-built transformers. If enough fail, the blackout could last years. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/magazine/national-blackout-power-electricity-outage.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6VA.0hLp.gIVk1dwYkKAH&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 20:07:34 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:07:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why Is It So Hard to Build the Thing Our Entire Power Supply Depends On? Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. Why Is It So Hard to Build the Thing Our Entire Power Supply Depends On? Transformers are the linchpin of modern civilization. A single one can take five years to build. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/08/17/magazine/transformers-power-electric-grid.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6VA.YkQF.14WC5VsBqJ3B&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ilsa.bartlett at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 20:19:44 2026 From: ilsa.bartlett at gmail.com (ilsa) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 13:19:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Hahahahahahahaah For a number of years while my daughter went to the Waldorf elementary School in valley forge Pennsylvania I got to see hands On beekeeping it was wonderful And then I just discovered a French organization that is working endlessly to protect bees from modern annihilation! Your articles made me giggle, ilsa Ilsa Bartlett Institute for Rewiring the System http://ilsabartlett.wordpress.com http://www.google.com/profiles/ilsa.bartlett www.hotlux.com/angel "Don't ever get so big or important that you can not hear and listen to every other person." -John Coltrane On Tue, Aug 18, 2026, 10:16?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:11?PM wrote: > > Easy solution: leave off with all store-bought honey. > > And buy from specialty places? How can she be sure they aren't diluting > either? > > > Adrian do urge your friend to get a hobby hive. They are not expensive, > and the needle-ass bitches make entertaining pets. > > She's way too busy to tend to one. (She's my wife and trying to keep > up with me - and succeeding well enough, enabling me to go further.) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Tue Aug 18 20:42:17 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:42:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why Is It So Hard to Build the Thing Our Entire Power Supply Depends On? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Someone has to say it: Because they're more than meets the eye. On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 4:08?PM John Clark via extropy-chat wrote: > > Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. > > Why Is It So Hard to Build the Thing Our Entire Power Supply Depends On? > > Transformers are the linchpin of modern civilization. A single one can take five years to build. > > https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/08/17/magazine/transformers-power-electric-grid.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6VA.YkQF.14WC5VsBqJ3B&smid=em-share > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 21:55:46 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 14:55:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <021a01dd2f5c$53a9b330$fafd1990$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of ilsa via extropy-chat Cc: ilsa Subject: Re: [ExI] Honey fraud Hahahahahahahaah For a number of years while my daughter went to the Waldorf elementary School in valley forge Pennsylvania I got to see hands On beekeeping it was wonderful And then I just discovered a French organization that is working endlessly to protect bees from modern annihilation! Your articles made me giggle, ilsa Ilsa Bartlett Bees aren?t hard to take care of. I don?t have a hive currently because if anyone anywhere in the neighborhood gets stung, they would assume it is my fault for providing housing. Regarding protecting bees, a recent observation worries me. In a way, bees are doing better than we think. They are declining, but all bugs are. I drove to Spokane Washington, a bit over 900 miles one way, thru farm country for a lot of the way. All the way up, we hit no bugs. On the way back, my windshield swatted exactly one bug, one point zero bugs. I used to hit dozens either way. Now one for the round trip. That represents a lot bigger and more sudden environmental change than global warming methinks. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Aug 18 22:53:53 2026 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 18:53:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: <021a01dd2f5c$53a9b330$fafd1990$@rainier66.com> References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2f5c$53a9b330$fafd1990$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: OMGoodness.... I never noticed this, but it's true. My windshield is dirty but it's from sap and dust and road dirt - not bugs. I don't recall the last time I scraped dead bugs off my windshield, but it used to be all the time, now not. That *is* scary. I'm on the other side of the USA from you, spike. Suburban/rural with small farms. :( There are plenty of bugs in my garden but mostly they are the gnat, skeeters, and no-see-um varieties. And ticks, if they count. Regards, MB spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > > Regarding protecting bees, a recent observation worries me. In a way, bees are doing better than we think. They are declining, but all bugs are. I drove to Spokane Washington, a bit over 900 miles one way, thru farm country for a lot of the way. All the way up, we hit no bugs. On the way back, my windshield swatted exactly one bug, one point zero bugs. I used to hit dozens either way. Now one for the round trip. > > > > That represents a lot bigger and more sudden environmental change than global warming methinks. > From spike at rainier66.com Tue Aug 18 23:37:19 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:37:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> <021a01dd2f5c$53a9b330$fafd1990$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <024d01dd2f6a$830f74d0$892e5e70$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of MB via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Honey fraud >...OMGoodness.... I never noticed this, but it's true. My windshield is dirty but it's from sap and dust and road dirt - not bugs. I don't recall the last time I scraped dead bugs off my windshield, but it used to be all the time, now not.... Regards, MB My comment about bees: they have declined, but perhaps not as much as other bugs have declined. Consider an experience most of us have had at some point: there's some big ugly galoot in the office, he has no friends, but you and he are the only two on a business trip, nothing to do, suggest going to dinner (why not, from his point of view, perhaps I am the big ugly galoot.) Come to find out, he isn't a bad guy at all. Just misunderstood. Still ugly perhaps, but hey, we boys are that way. After that trip, he's a friend. OK cool. Cockroaches are that big ugly galoot. If ever there was a misunderstood bug, it is that guy. I certainly agree they are ugly, but other than that, they aren't bad guys. They eat our food, well hell, what's wrong with that? We eat our food. Put your food away after the meal, wipe the counter, done. Ants eat our food too, if we let them. Plenty of insects will eat our food, but cockroaches are singled out, unfairly in my opinion. They don't carry disease any more than any other bug. They don't get on dog turds, then get on your picnic food, as flies do. OK then, fine, suppose they are just like any other bug, still big ugly galoots but not really bad guys. They can't sting you or bite you, they don't really make you sick any more than other bugs do. They are just misunderstood. Please, when is the last time... you saw a cockroach? Didn't they use to be all over the damn place in the old days? So why aren't they now? What happened? Did we hate them so much we tuned our chemical pesticides specifically against cockroaches? And did we eventually just defeat them? And if so, well congratu-freaking-lations humanity, you managed to exterminate a perfectly harmless big ugly galoot who was really not a bad guy at all, just misunderstood. spike From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 05:23:05 2026 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 22:23:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: Bees in France have a really hard time with the murder hornets. Last time I looked, the hornets had spread as far as Spain. European bees have no defense, and a hornet nest can clean out a hive in a few hours. When this first happened, I tried to connect them with Jordan Kare's company, which had a laser bug zapper that figured out what it was about to blast. Installed on bee hives, it could have burned the hornets out of the air and protected the bees. But I had no luck in connecting them. The UK gets a few of these hornets that are blown or fly over the channel every year, but so far, they have kept them under control. Keith On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:20?PM ilsa via extropy-chat < extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > Hahahahahahahaah > For a number of years while my daughter went to the Waldorf elementary > School in valley forge Pennsylvania I got to see hands On beekeeping it was > wonderful > And then I just discovered a French organization that is working endlessly > to protect bees from modern annihilation! Your articles made me giggle, ilsa > > Ilsa Bartlett > Institute for Rewiring the System > http://ilsabartlett.wordpress.com > http://www.google.com/profiles/ilsa.bartlett > www.hotlux.com/angel > > "Don't ever get so big or important that you can not hear and listen to > every other person." > -John Coltrane > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026, 10:16?AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat < > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:11?PM wrote: >> > Easy solution: leave off with all store-bought honey. >> >> And buy from specialty places? How can she be sure they aren't diluting >> either? >> >> > Adrian do urge your friend to get a hobby hive. They are not >> expensive, and the needle-ass bitches make entertaining pets. >> >> She's way too busy to tend to one. (She's my wife and trying to keep >> up with me - and succeeding well enough, enabling me to go further.) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 10:29:08 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 06:29:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 3:29?PM wrote: > *>?The probability of a teenager dying from Covid were very low, but the >> probability of a teenager dying from the Covid vaccine were even lower. >> That's why the recommendation that teenagers continue to receive the Covid >> shot did not change. It's a fact of life that Epidemiologists like Dr. >> Fauci need to constantly waigh one risk against another, it comes with the >> territory and can't be avoided. * > > > > *> I am having a bit of heartburn trusting life and death decisions to a > guy who pled the fifth over a hundred times* > *Your buddy King Donald The First invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times during a 2022 deposition in the New York Attorney General's investigation into Donald's unethical and probably illegal business practices. I guess he had forgotten that in 2016, before he had become the King, Donald said ?The mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment??* > *> while holding a blanket pardon. * > *So you're saying it was wrong for Biden to give a pardon to save a doctor from a partisan witch hunt, but it was OK for King Donald to give 1580 blanket pardons (and 14 commutations) to the traitors who were part of his unsuccessful January 6, 2021 coup d'?tat attempt? * *John K Clark* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 10:47:55 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 06:47:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: <01dc01dd2f47$57060a20$05121e60$@rainier66.com> References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <01dc01dd2f47$57060a20$05121e60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 3:25?PM wrote: *> John I was not referring to past elections, for that is not my concern, > but rather to future ones. * > *Spike, I'd really like to believe you because I think basically you're a good person, but given the fact that you have never shown any concern over the huge mob of neo-Nazis, conspiracy theorists, and white supremacists waving confederate flags that tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election on January 6, 2021, I have a little bit of difficulty believing in your sincere concern about the integrity of future elections. * *John K Clark* > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 20:36:15 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 16:36:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The summer Math fell to the machine Message-ID: *The summer Math fell to the machine* John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis 6s' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 19 21:01:33 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:01:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Honey fraud In-Reply-To: References: <017a01dd2f31$ea13c4d0$be3b4e70$@rainier66.com> <018b01dd2f34$91c1e070$b545a150$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <010901dd301d$eb1a0a00$c14e1e00$@rainier66.com> From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Keith Henson via extropy-chat Subject: Re: [ExI] Honey fraud >?Bees in France have a really hard time with the murder hornets. Last time I looked, the hornets had spread as far as Spain. European bees have no defense, and a hornet nest can clean out a hive in a few hours. >?When this first happened, I tried to connect them with Jordan Kare's company, which had a laser bug zapper that figured out what it was about to blast. Installed on bee hives, it could have burned the hornets out of the air and protected the bees. But I had no luck in connecting them. >?The UK gets a few of these hornets that are blown or fly over the channel every year, but so far, they have kept them under control. Keith Keith, I failed to carry out my idea last time this came up in this medium. The entrance to a commercial beehive is a narrow slot. Bees can fly thru it, but murder hornets must walk thru. So place two electrified copper strips across the entrance, far enough apart the bees can?t span it but the hornets are murdered. I like the idea of a laser bug zapper as much as anyone but that electrified copper strip idea is cheaper and easy to install: a strip of tape with copper strips on either side and wires soldered on. Won?t those murderous hornets be surprised: they have successfully eaten dozens of beehives, then one sunny day when some Jacobin murder hornet least expects it, le hive suddenly explodes, ending his reign of terror, turning him into a french fry. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 19 21:15:52 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:15:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark > I am having a bit of heartburn trusting life and death decisions to a guy who pled the fifth over a hundred times >?Your buddy King Donald The First invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times during a 2022 deposition in the New York Attorney General's investigation into Donald's unethical and probably illegal business practices?. He didn?t have a blanket pardon, as Dr. Fauci does. Dr. Fauci cannot be incriminated if he cannot be prosecuted. >?I guess he had forgotten that in 2016, before he had become the King, Donald said ?The mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?? Weaponized legal system John. Our legal system has been weaponized for political purposes. > while holding a blanket pardon. >?So you're saying it was wrong for Biden to give a pardon to save a doctor from a partisan witch hunt, but it was OK for King Donald to give 1580 blanket pardons (and 14 commutations) to the traitors who were part of his unsuccessful January 6, 2021 coup d'?tat attempt? John K Clark Had that been a coup attempt, they would have come armed. A native American shaman with a ceremonial spear isn?t a coup attempt. It?s a demonstration or a protest. But notice the difference between how that was handled vs the 11 June 2025 protest where rioters attempted to torch a federal building when federal employees were still in it (the senators had already evacuated the capital building by the time the protestors came in the door.) Second example: a guy tried to set fire to a federal courthouse, also in Portland, on 13 July 2020. None of those who went to prison for the Jan 2020 riot attempted to burn down the place. The shaman didn?t destroy or damage any federal property, nor attempt to harm anyone. Regarding partisan witch hunt: we strongly suspect Dr. Fauci funded dangerous gain of function research in Wuhan. He denies it. He cannot be prosecuted for funding that research. But many of us still suspect he did it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 19 21:25:38 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:25:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX In-Reply-To: References: <015201dd2f26$17e59ed0$47b0dc70$@rainier66.com> <01dc01dd2f47$57060a20$05121e60$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <012d01dd3021$48658650$d93092f0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark Sent: Wednesday, 19 August, 2026 3:48 AM To: spike at rainier66.com Cc: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 3:25?PM > wrote: > John I was not referring to past elections, for that is not my concern, but rather to future ones. >?Spike, I'd really like to believe you because I think basically you're a good person, but given the fact that you have never shown any concern over the huge mob of neo-Nazis, conspiracy theorists, and white supremacists waving confederate flags that tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election on January 6, 2021, I have a little bit of difficulty believing in your sincere concern about the integrity of future elections. John K Clark John, you don?t get it. The capital is just an office building, one with underground tunnels to allow egress in the event of exactly what happened: a riot. The white supremacist waving confederate flags were infiltrators. We know about them, for we had that kind of thing every time we had a local libertarian gathering: a coupla guys we didn?t know would show up, unfurl a nazi flag, a third guy would snap a photo, and they would be gone within a minute. When you see stuff that is clearly theatrical, such as confederate flags (note which party was the actual Confederacy) we know what those are: infiltrators. Regarding my concern for integrity of future elections, think over the risk if money somehow flows into registering new voters, California registers jillions of them under the (only) party in California, then millions of filled out and signed ballots come back with the other party votes, all the way down the ticket. All those seats change hands, the EC changes over to the other party (the one you don?t like.) So? now what? Does the governor claim all those newly registered voters are bogus and sends the other delegates anyway? Then what? We have an election at the national level where we really don?t know who won. Then what? Is it so hard to see, with machine voting (still (in spite of repeated ?errors? (and persistent failure to prove they cannot be hacked))) with legal ballot harvesting, with all the possible failures in California?s system, that California is low-hanging fruit for those who would steal an election? So what if they do? Then what? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike at rainier66.com Wed Aug 19 23:15:25 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 16:15:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <016601dd3030$9ea8f7e0$dbfae7a0$@rainier66.com> From: John Clark . > while holding a blanket pardon. >?So you're saying it was wrong for Biden? The comment was about Dr. Fauci, not Biden. >?to give a pardon to save a doctor? John K Clark John, think about birth control pills, introduced in 1960. In the first iteration, the hormone dosage was too high, but it was discovered that they were effective at lower doses, which were safer and had fewer side effects. The pills were reformulated in 1962. This resulted in a lot more women taking them. The birth rate dropped in the USA from about 24 to about 18 (per 1000 population) in a span of about six years. Dr. Fauci was in college during those years, so good chance he was up to speed on birth control pills. College students tend to be interested in that kind of thing. When Dr. Fauci was getting reliable reports of negative consequences of the mRNA covid vaccines, as we found out three days ago, particularly on the second dose of the vaccine, the very obvious safest course of action would have been to split the second round into two doses, and increase the time interval between them. No one really knew the minimum dose of mRNA to produce immunity. Why not try lower doses? Or spread them out? Hell even a mere rocket scientist could easily think of that solution. Doctors should have been all over it. So why wasn?t it done that way? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 02:25:33 2026 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 22:25:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 5:16?PM spike jones via extropy-chat wrote: > From: John Clark > >?Your buddy King Donald The First invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times during a 2022 deposition in the New York Attorney General's investigation into Donald's unethical and probably illegal business practices?. > > He didn?t have a blanket pardon, as Dr. Fauci does. Dr. Fauci cannot be incriminated if he cannot be prosecuted. A sitting US President can not be prosecuted so long as he is in office. Even just running for office gave him enough protection to, in practice, forestall any attempt to prosecute him during his 4 years out of office. On the other hand, the hearing Dr. Fauci was attending was explicitly intended to find anything that Dr. Fauci could be prosecuted on - anything outside the confines of his pardon (which was rather more limited than the term "blanket" implies). That's a textbook case of where the Fifth Amendment applies. From spike at rainier66.com Thu Aug 20 05:23:05 2026 From: spike at rainier66.com (spike at rainier66.com) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 22:23:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: <01a601dd3063$fc0b56c0$f4220440$@rainier66.com> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat >>... He didn?t have a blanket pardon, as Dr. Fauci does. Dr. Fauci cannot be incriminated if he cannot be prosecuted. >...A sitting US President can not be prosecuted so long as he is in office. Even just running for office gave him enough protection to, in practice, forestall any attempt to prosecute him during his 4 years out of office. >...On the other hand, the hearing Dr. Fauci was attending was explicitly intended to find anything that Dr. Fauci could be prosecuted on - anything outside the confines of his pardon (which was rather more limited than the term "blanket" implies). That's a textbook case of where the Fifth Amendment applies. _______________________________________________ Ja, what I sense is that Rand Paul wanted to ask him point blank if he approved funding for viral gain of function research in China, since it is crazy expensive to do that research in the states: the precautions required here make it prohibitive. China is more open minded about GOF studies, and they have a convenient way to get rid of the dead bats: they EAT the damn things. Dr. Fauci has never admitted the USA funded GOF research in China, but plenty of us suspect that's what happened. We may never find out why the CDC didn't cut the mRNA dosage or extend the interval between vaccinations after it had reliable reports of adverse reactions, particularly after the second injection. Is it not clear enough that the prudent course would be to divide the second dose? In principle, that should still produce the desired immunity. In practice, word got around quickly that the second dose often carried negative outcomes (that kind of news travels quickly thru schools.) Many students responded by taking only the first, not taking the second dose. I was on a committee which we call the SSC, School Site Council. We discussed what action the school should take if students took only one dose. Should we exclude them from activities, and if so, could we do so legally? At that time it wasn't clear we could legally exclude them even if they took no vaccines. Reasoning: they might have been early catchers, and if so, they would have natural immunity and wouldn't need the vaccine at all. So what if they had one of two? Adrian, what would you have recommended? With the risk the school district could get our collective asses sued off should we pressure students to get vaccinated then a student perished, the committee recommended allowing single-dose students to participate. The impact was not clear. In practice (as far as I know) they didn't exclude even the non-vax students. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 10:14:53 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 06:14:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <016601dd3030$9ea8f7e0$dbfae7a0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> <016601dd3030$9ea8f7e0$dbfae7a0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 7:15?PM wrote: > *When Dr. Fauci was getting reliable reports of negative consequences of > the mRNA covid vaccines* [...] > *There have been BILLIONS of injections of the mRNA covid vaccine and the number of deaths caused by a negative reaction to it can be counted on the fingers of one hand. T**he mRNA covid vaccine is the safest vaccine ever made and one of the safest medications of any sort; **mRNA technology is something science can be very proud of. * > *> No one really knew the minimum dose of mRNA to produce immunity. Why > not try lower doses? Or spread them out?* > *I'll tell you exactly why. Just before the vaccine was released about 3500 Americans were dying of Covid EACH DAY, so every HOUR that you're screwing around trying to determine the absolute minimum dosage instead of just giving people the vaccine you're killing 146 Americans and making more than 10 times that number very sick. * *John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 11:18:38 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 07:18:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] etymology of just a piece of paper In-Reply-To: <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> References: <009301dd2d12$04249330$0c6db990$@rainier66.com> <003f01dd2d77$6d0bc930$47235b90$@rainier66.com> <00b901dd2da1$1fb05fa0$5f111ee0$@rainier66.com> <008c01dd2e47$ac7c83e0$05758ba0$@rainier66.com> <011b01dd2e7c$9e72d0d0$db587270$@rainier66.com> <013001dd2f23$b770d990$26528cb0$@rainier66.com> <01b201dd2f3f$e506b4d0$af141e70$@rainier66.com> <01e301dd2f47$daf2c670$90d85350$@rainier66.com> <012001dd301f$eb2a99e0$c17fcda0$@rainier66.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 5:15?PM wrote: > *>>?Your buddy King Donald The First invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times >> during a 2022 deposition in the New York Attorney General's investigation >> into Donald's unethical and probably illegal business practices?.* > > > > *>He didn?t have a blanket pardon, as Dr. Fauci does. Dr. Fauci cannot be > incriminated if he cannot be prosecuted.* > *Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see what that has to do with the price of eggs in China. * > > *>> ?I guess he had forgotten that in 2016**, **before he had become the >> King**,** Donald said ?The mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why >> are you taking the Fifth Amendment??* > > > > *> Weaponized legal system John. Our legal system has been weaponized for > political purposes.* > *A keen grasp of the obvious. One of the key goals of Donald's second term of office is revenge, and his Justice Department is a good way for him to get it. * *>>?So you're saying it was wrong for Biden to give a pardon to save a >> doctor from a partisan witch hunt, but it was OK for King Donald to give >> 1580 blanket pardons (and 14 commutations) to the traitors who were part >> of his unsuccessful January 6, 2021 coup d'?tat attempt? * > > > > *> Had that been a coup attempt, they would have come armed. * > *A coup d'?tat is by definition a sudden, illegal takeover of a government by a small group of political insiders who force out the current leaders or attempt to change the results of a free election. And that fits the description of what happened on January 6, 2021 when a man that had lost a presidential election gathered together a huge mob and told them to march to the Capitol Building and get the people inside to change the results of a free election. And if it wasn't for the actions of the vice president it would've been a successful coup d'?tat. * > *> A native American shaman with a ceremonial spear isn?t coup d'?tat. * > *It is a coup d'?tat if that particular spear carrying thug is part of a mob led by the President of the United States that overwhelmed the capital police and made its way inside the Senate chamber while his fellow mob members smeared their feces on the walls of the capital while carrying confederate flags. That had not happened before even during the Civil War! We used to be able to brag that we had always had a peaceful transfer of power after an election, but we can't say that anymore. And to any lover of the Constitution that should be unforgivable, but not for you, Donald is and will always be Mr. Perfect.* *>the senators had already evacuated the capital building by the time the > protestors came in the door* *Well let's see what Elon Musk's Grok has to say about your claim. * *ME: Somebody told me that on January 6, 2021 "the senators and congressman had already evacuated the capital building by the time the protestors came in the door" is that correct?* *Grok: "**No, that is not correct.* Rioters (often called protesters in some accounts) first entered the U.S. Capitol building *while* members of Congress were still inside conducting the electoral vote certification. *Evacuation of senators, representatives, and Vice President Mike Pence occurred * *after** the initial breaches, not before*. Key points from contemporaneous reporting and detailed timelines (Washington Post, New York Times, CNN, Newsweek, BBC, USA Today, and others): - Outer barricades were breached earlier (around 1?1:45 p.m.), with crowds advancing on the building. Office buildings nearby were ordered evacuated around 1:26 p.m., but the Capitol itself (where Congress was meeting) had not been emptied. - Rioters first forced entry into the Capitol building itself around *2:11?2:15 p.m.* (breaking windows and doors on the northwest side/Senate wing and elsewhere). Video and security footage confirm people climbing through smashed windows and streaming inside shortly after 2 p.m. - At that moment, the joint session had split into House and Senate chambers to debate an objection to Arizona?s electors. Proceedings were still underway. Pence was presiding in the Senate; lawmakers were present and debating. - Evacuation orders followed the breaches: - Around 2:13 p.m., Secret Service moved Pence from the Senate floor (he remained in the complex initially). - The Senate was called into recess shortly after the first entries; members were ordered out around 2:20?2:30 p.m. - The House adjourned around 2:20 p.m.; evacuation of the House chamber and gallery continued into the 2:40s, with some members still inside or nearby when rioters reached doors and the Speaker?s Lobby. Ashli Babbitt was shot at about 2:44 p.m. while attempting to enter that area as lawmakers were still being cleared. - *Some members and staff were trapped or delayed inside* offices, galleries, or corridors for longer; others were moved to secure locations (including tunnels to office buildings or, for leadership, Fort McNair). Congress did not fully reconvene until later that evening after the building was cleared. In short:* the building was breached with Congress still in session inside*. Members were ordered to evacuate in response to the intrusion, and some came close to the advancing crowd (e.g., reports of rioters within tens of feet of chambers or of officers redirecting groups away from senators). The claim that everyone had already left by the time people ?came in the door? does not match the established timeline." * John K Clark* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 11:44:17 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 07:44:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?From_Covid_to_Cancer=3A_How_Moderna=E2=80=99s_St?= =?utf-8?q?ock_Jumped_177=25_in_a_Day?= Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. >From Covid to Cancer: How Moderna?s Stock Jumped 177% in a Day The company?s fortunes cratered as demand for Covid-19 vaccines plummeted. But it was busy working on something else. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/20/business/moderna-cancer-melanoma.html?unlocked_article_code=1.61A.LjsK.jLtOmG8UMlUq&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 12:00:09 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 08:00:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?NASA=E2=80=99s_Attempt_to_Save_Its_Falling_Teles?= =?utf-8?q?cope_Has_Failed?= Message-ID: Explore this gift article from The New York Times. You can read it for free without a subscription. NASA?s Attempt to Save Its Falling Telescope Has Failed NASA?s Swift Observatory, which studies some of the most powerful explosions in the universe, will soon burn up in the atmosphere. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/19/science/nasa-swift-telescope-failed-rescue.html?unlocked_article_code=1.61A.mUGp.5xLT6UUs7zkj&smid=em-share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Aug 20 12:36:55 2026 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 08:36:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A surprise bonus from COVID-19 vaccines: bolstering cancer treatment Message-ID: *The following article was in today's issue of the journal Science: * *A surprise bonus from COVID-19 vaccines: bolstering cancer treatment* *And this article from the journal Nature also became available today:* *SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines sensitize tumours to immune checkpoint blockade* John K Clark See what's on my list at Extropolis 03d -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: