<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Will Steinberg via extropy-chat<br><b>ubject:</b> Re: [ExI] Jimmy 'the Greek' Snyder<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…No police is a horrible idea just because the alternative is protection rackets as Rafal mentioned. Good way for security forces to become WAY more militarized (competition) while also becoming basically the mafia. In fact I'm sure a lot of private protection squads would be LITERALLY run by organized crime… Will<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Since the start of the quarantine, I have been pondering the fact that we have built up cities with a population density high enough to make street traffic mostly impractical, social distancing nearly impossible and causing the proletariat to rely on mass transit, which we already know is inherently dangerous.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>For safety reasons, that level of population density must come down. We don’t know how exactly.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The biggest rioting is coming from those areas where population density is the highest. The loudest calls to disband the police force is coming from those dense areas.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Suppose the local constabulary decides nearly unanimously that law enforcement is too dangerous as a way to make a living. Or city governments decide to disband the force. In that scenario, the really dense cities will likely start to empty out. Living there or even working there has become too risky.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I predict that peak population density has passed, and peak motive to live or work in a high density area has passed. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Can anyone suggest a reason why either prediction is wrong?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>spike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>