[extropy-chat] [Pigdog] Fwd: Extropian Trash

[Mike Lorrey]

too self-serious, you should try to deconstruct her arguments with
similar scorn and humor

--- Gina Miller <nanogirl at halcyon.com> wrote:

> Okay I wrote up a response to the article that we read about us. I
> would like you all to read it and especially Natasha, let me know if
> it's stamped to go and I will send it to the newspaper and to her
> email address. This was the best I could do considering my time
> constrants. g`
> 
> Extropian trash
> 
> This is my personal response to the article that appeared in the San
> Francisco Bay Guardian
> http://www.sfbg.com/38/50/x_techsploitation.html . I wrote this
> article because I felt compelled to clarify some of the uninformed
> statements made in this article. This response has not been written
> by the Extropians, the opinions expressed are my own.
> 
> 
> 1.)I HATE THE extropians.
> 1.) "Hate" (capitalized non the less) is a strong word from some one
> I have never met and has never met me. Even though I strongly
> disagree with the author's opinions regarding my Extropian friends, I
> do not hate the author and this dialog would not benefit anyone,
> including myself, especially if I am trying to establish a rational
> point.
> 
> 2.) I just can't say enough bad things about their whole stupid, late
> 1980s-Los Angeles robot cult philosophy, which I'm convinced was
> inspired by a combination of Christianity, transactional analysis,
> and (perhaps worst of all) the science fiction of Robert Heinlein. 
> 
> 2.) I am not a roboticist nor a Christian, and Heinlein did not
> influence me to be interested in anything or support anyone.
> 
> 3.) Picture this: It's 1985, and a bunch of people, too young to have
> been hippies, too old to understand yet that Massachusetts Institute
> of Technology's Media Lab is doomed to be irrelevant, are still
> recovering from having grown up during the 1960s "rocket age."
> 
> 3.) I was not raised in the 1960's and in 1985 I was still in school.
> In fact, I believe I was born the same year as the author of this
> article. So this sociological analysis is a generalization, and an
> unfounded one at that. I have met many Extropians of many ages, with
> many diverse personalities, interests and belief systems, who do not
> fit into the above described box. 
> 
> 4.) Now they're living in California
> 
> 4.) We live all over America as well as over seas. I am currently not
> living in California. However, I do understand the association that
> is being drawn, technology and Silicon Valley are being married
> together here, however a location does not dictate a state of mind. 
> 
> 5.) doing boring jobs or going to stupid private universities,
> 
> 5.) First let me say that I am surprised that private universities
> are described as "stupid". I personally have not been to enough
> private universities to study the curriculum or how well the system
> functions, nor have I studied the statistics to determine or form an
> opinion on the current bar of education at these facilities as
> compared to other universities, but perhaps the author has done so,
> and has simply left the evidence out of the article. 
> 
> I also do not know where the information of Extropians have "boring
> jobs" or attending "private universities" was received from. The word
> "boring" is highly subjective, so what is boring for one is not
> boring for another, thus the statement itself is speculative. I know
> many Extropians who do very exciting, intellectual and productive
> work. I also am married to a Harvard PhD graduate, my best friend
> attended M.I.T. and many of my Extropian friends have attended a
> myriad of schools, and some have not attended any. Their jobs, are
> also just as diverse, from artists to astronomers. 
> 
>  6.) and the flying cars they were promised on The Jetsons are
> nowhere to be seen. Plus, nobody has cured cancer,
> 
> 6.) This is a very, very, crucial point that I am glad the author has
> pointed out. In 1993 nanotechnology was introduced to me. When I
> realized the potential benefits that future applications of this
> emerging technology could have on society, I began my research (see
> www.nanoindustries.com). In particular one of the most intriguing is
> the impact it will have on biotechnology. The theorized treatments
> and monitors could change the face of medicine. It has been over a
> decade now and I have now been happily married to a man for four
> years (married 2000), the love of my life, who helped organize one of
> the first nanotechnology conferences, wrote many articles and edited
> books on the topic, and is a loving, caring person (see #12). It was
> our common interest in nanotechnology that in fact, brought us
> together. In May, he was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a form of
> cancer, and is currently undergoing chemotherapy. Would I prefer that
> my husband could have the advantages of nanotechnology or other
> advances as an alternative to the tiring and immune suppressive
> chemotherapy that he is now undergoing, absolutely. Would I like the
> same to be available for others, absolutely. We both would like to
> see the continuation and aide of medical and other advances continue
> in a safe and educated manner. Today when you are ill, you go to the
> hospital to receive treatment, it's not considered selfish (see #11)
> we access technology to help alleviate our pain and cure what ails
> us. We use technology to communicate via website, like I have, like
> the author of this article has. Just because technology is often
> scary when it is not here yet, we can not ignore it's usefulness,
> even in today's world. This doesn't mean that we can not contemplate
> the benefits and the risks either, that is exactly the sort of debate
> that goes on within the Extropian community. How do we guide, how do
> we prevent, etc.
> 
> It was many years after my interest in nanotechnology that I
> discovered the Extropians (I believe it was 1998?). I found a place
> where I could address the big questions in life in an intelligent
> forum with insightful people. There was not only discussion of my
> particular interest, but also philosophical issues, art, science,
> language, psychology, music, space, the universe, genetics, current
> events, history, biology, ethics, the environment, the mind, the list
> could go on and on. The topics are not one sided, opinions vary and
> these are expressed in healthy debate. This type of dialog is an
> example of how communication is often education. 
> 
> 7.) the light-filled aliens haven't arrived to impart wisdom,
> 
> 7.) Do I really have to express that I have never expected such an
> arrival?
> 
> 8.) and there still isn't an anti-aging drug they can take to
> preserve their wrinkle-free, 
> 
> preternatural tans. 
> 
> 8.) I have no idea what she means by this? I don't even tan, in fact,
> I glow in the dark.
> 
> 9.) So they get into self-improvement, but with a high-tech twist.
> They call their movement "extropy" - you know, like the opposite of
> "entropy," the process of slowing down and descending into chaos.
> Extropy is supposedly a way of always progressing, growing, and
> transforming oneself, particularly by using science. And the
> extropians decide that science is going to save them from everything,
> especially growing old and dying. It will be just like heaven, only
> with a lot more tantric sex and smart drugs. 
> 
> 9.) I have never heard the term "heaven" used to describe the future
> that we hope for. What I have heard is a need for resolution of the
> problems that we currently face. Every day we watch the news and are
> all somberly aware that there are things that we need to work on. We
> live in a world of suffering, hunger, disease, pollution, why would
> we not try to investigate and support solutions for these problems? 
> 
> 10.) Some of them start theorizing that in the future they'll be able
> to upload their brains into computers. Others request that their
> bodies or heads be cryogenically frozen after they die so they can be
> revived, Futurama-style, in a far-distant future in which everything
> is perfect and glorious and subject only to the laws of extropy. 
> 
> 10.) Cryonics suspension does not mean that those who are revived
> will be revived in a "far-distant, Futurama-style" future, but rather
> when the technology to revive them becomes available, when ever that
> is. That could be five years from now or a hundred years from now.
> The goal is not to wake up in a "perfect" futuristic world, but
> merely to wake up! 
> 
> Something else to note: not everyone who is an Extropian is signed up
> for cryonics and not everyone signed up for cryonics is an Extropian.
> 
> 11.) You think I'm kidding, don't you? But I'm not. The extropian
> thing only got more popular all through the 1990s, riding the wave of
> dot-com psychosis into a mire of self-help delusions. Calling
> themselves "transhumanists" or "posthumanists," the extropians
> continue to preach longevity and techno-rapture and, occasionally,
> hedonism. Most of all, they proselytize for rampant individualism:
> it's all about achieving your dreams, making real life into science
> fiction so you can be whatever you want. 
> 
> 11.) This goes back to the answer above (#9), the descriptions used
> here "self-help delusions",  "occasionally, hedonism" (#6), and
> "rampant individualism" are not at all applicable descriptions when
> you look at the fact that our group is interested in benefiting
> society as a whole. Of course if you imagine a world that is better
> for all, you can also imagine a world that is better for the
> individual. There are many benefits in the world today that can be
> seen as benefiting the whole and the individual, much of the advances
> accomplished today do so. 
> 
> Supporting technology does not mean that we believe anybody can do
> "whatever you want", we are not envisioning anarchy. Our moral fibre
> is intact. 
> 
> Our vision of the future is to utilize advancements to achieve a
> healthy environment, healthy bodies, healthy minds, and general well
> being. This is the same vision that we have for the majority used
> today in bringing all of our advances into our daily lives, at the
> doctors, at work, in our pockets and into our kitchens and living
> rooms. 
> 
> And to quote "it's all about achieving your dreams", when did that
> become a faux pas? Isn't that what our grandmothers and mothers told
> us since we were small children? So isn't the alternative to say,
> don't follow your dreams, be unhappy, that doesn't make any sense to
> me.
> 
> 12.) It's precisely the kind of pseudo-religion that would appeal to
> people whose lifelong devotion to high-tech capitalism leaves them
> with no value system other than personal accumulation.
> 
> 12.) Extropy is not a religious structure. My personal experience
> with fellow members has not displayed the lack of "value system" that
> the author describes. It's shocking that we are some how
> mis-interpreted as non-human and non-hearted folk, just because we
> want to see technology continue to help solve the worlds problems.
> Extropians are just as caring, family oriented and generous as any of
> the most kind people anybody else knows in their own lives. There
> have been times in my life where I turned to my Extropian friends and
> they all came to my aide in my time of need (#11), and I am referring
> emotional need (#14). We all have families and friends, we all have
> compassion and there are those of us who are not well enough off to
> invest in the "high-tech" companies or even to "accumulate" things.
> If materialism was a requirement, I and others certainly wouldn't be
> there.
> 
> 13.) After all, extropian heaven is automatically within reach if you
> can afford all the life-extending gadgets and pills that will
> supposedly hit the marketplace any day now. I suppose that's why
> various stripes of extropianism have flowered among professional
> geeks who want to believe there's something more to existence than
> coding all day. Of course, that something is just more of the very
> same life they're already leading - which means they'll outlive their
> retirement on all that Google stock money. 
> 
> 13.) Again, I am speaking personally here, I have no Google
> investment (money again?), and I do not take pills, except for
> "Flintstones Complete". But I do strongly disagree with the idea that
> taking protein powders or life extension pills is wrong. Why? Are
> vitamins wrong? Is medication wrong? Is healthy eating wrong? Is
> exercise wrong? It's the same thing. It's a personal choice to care
> for your body so you can live a long and healthy life for yourself
> and those around you. 
> 
> 14.) Although not yet as powerful as other annoying cults like
> evangelical Christianity and Scientology, transhumanism definitely
> has the potential to catch on, big time. First of all, it's already
> fairly popular among members of the nerd elite, who have money and
> control the blogosphere (I have a sudden urge to invent extropian
> blog conspiracy theories!).
> 
> 14.) Why is there this instance that we all have money, I imagine
> some of us do, but if I do, please kindly send me the safe deposit
> key so that I may access it. During this time with my husbands
> illness and our insurance companies lack of ability to pay for the
> treatments, we sure could use it.
> 
> People who speculate on theories, discuss and support the
> possibilities of technology or the future, do not need money to do
> so. 
> 
> 15.) Maybe some of them can create an ExtroPAC that funds politicians
> who agree to support foolish longevity research. Plus, the extropians
> are a perfect fit for the U.S. political system because they appear
> to offer an alternative way of thinking while actually reinforcing
> the status quo. 
> 
> 15.) Extropy is not associated with any political party.
> 
> 16.) Extropians, for all their future worship,
> 
> 16.) We do not "worship" the future, as the future is yet untold, we
> are only discussing and preparing for it to be a better future than
> days gone by.
> 
> 17.) are part of the same cultural bent toward superstition that has
> led George W. Bush and other right-wingers to proclaim that stem
> cells are full of little souls, abortion is murder, global warming
> isn't a threat, and peer-to-peer networks are used primarily to
> disseminate child pornography. The only difference between a Bush
> conservative and a transhumanist is that conservatives project their
> fears onto technologies they don't understand, while transhumanists
> project their hopes. Either way, you've got a magical interpretation
> of science being advanced as a creepy political agenda. 
> 
> 17.) This analogy is somewhat confusing. While I agree with the
> insinuation the author has regarding George W. Bush (and I am
> speaking for myself, not the Extropians), I am not clear on how we
> are just like him except for "projecting hope"? This is a very odd
> metaphor since the author almost seems to be agreeing with my
> ideologies so the parallel is almost the proof!
> 
> 18.) And let there be no doubt about it: the extropian agenda is
> creepy. Who wants to live forever in a world where only the richest
> people in developed countries will become immortal? It's not as if
> there's going to be a special cryogenics fund for everybody in Kenya
> and Chile. 
> 
> 18.) Extropy is not just cryonic suspension (the term cryogenics is a
> related procedural general term). Yes Extropians see the advantages
> of future technological applications, much in the same we are
> currently living with the benefits of modern medicine. However, not
> every single Extropian is signed up for cryonic suspension. Since the
> Extropian movement does not include only members who believe in "such
> and such technology" it is more generally open since emerging
> technologies tend to relate to each other. 
> 
> Another point is, that it is not expensive to sign up for cryonics,
> if you opt to pay by simply paying a standard insurance payment
> rather than a flat fee.
> 
> Nanotechnology for example would give those who live in poverty
> access to manufacture their own supplies for practically no cost due
> to it's use of raw materials. 
> 
> 19.) In order for people to live forever in the transhumanist future,
> some people will still have to live like trash. Sounds sort of like
> entropy to me. 
> 
> 19.) I'm not sure what the author means by "live like trash". If I
> were to assume that she meant those who are not financially secure,
> then I would also assume those who are not, might find the "trash"
> reference objectionable. With that said, there are very wide
> distances between the rich and the poor in the world we in live in
> today (#18). Many of the technologies we as Extropians discuss, aim
> to shorten that distance. 
> 
> 
> 
> 20.) Annalee Newitz (lycanthropy at techsploitation.com) is a surly
> media nerd and spazhumanist who would rather die than be an
> extropian. Her column also appears in Metro, Silicon Valley's weekly
> newspaper. 
> 
> 20.) I tried to look the word "spazhumanist" up, but apparently it's
> not a real word. 
> 
> 
> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
> Nanotechnology Industries
> http://www.nanoindustries.com
> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html
> Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
> Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
> Tech-Aid Advisor http://www.tech-aid.info/t/all-about.html
> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com
> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."
> > _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail