[extropy-chat] Re: Life in Biosphere 1

[Brett Paatsch]

Lifespan Pharma Inc wrote:

> That [below] probably sums up why many people ignore most
> everything except what their neighbours and friends and family
> tell them by experience works.
>
> They assume that 99% is bullshit and watch for others to sift through the 
> shit to findthe shinola.
> In the past when change came slowly this worked well.
> Now as change accelerates the risk is that the shinola to shit ratio is 
> increasing and the old patterns are
> reducing the public acceptance and utilization of the benefits of change.

I'm not sure that the ratio is changing. I'm not confident that its 99 : 1
but I don't think its substantially changing.  I think technology has made
it easier to educate the average person to a level where the average
person today is genuinely more knowledgeable about science and
about other people than the average person of previous generations.

The base is going up I think, but the median is holding the lead back
through the social constructions that are democratic government, and
that may not be a bad thing, for the mean. And it is a problem for
the lead that can be addressed in different ways.

> This especially applies to the rural communities as opposed to the
> urban ones disproportionately.

You might be right here. Rural communities in Australia and the US
are likely to be somewhat less hooked in to the sort of technology
that helps speed the process of education - such as broadband
internet connections etc.

And if you look to the developing world that would certainly be
the case.

> However if the benefit is extended lifespan the risk for time wasted must 
> be rebalanced  against time gained.

Not sure what you mean there, can you elaborate?

Brett Paatsch

Ps: It would be less cumbersome if we ditched the top posting.


> Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
>> Brent Neal wrote:
>>
>>> (6/21/05 8:29) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, Bill, they don't. You don't have a right to safety when you engage
>>>> in commerce ignorantly, just as you don't have a right to police
>>>> protection. Who says you shouldn't live in a world full of fraudsters
>>>> if you don't take your personal responsibility to litigate against
>>>> those who defraud you? Most infomercials on tv today are frauds or
>>>> scams: weight loss products, cheap exercise machines, beauty products.
>>>> Frauders abound in the email world.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, you discount the cost of all of this.  Not in terms of 
>>> 'chilling
>>> effect,' but in terms of precious, valuable time.  How on earth am I
>>> supposed to have time to contribute in a meaningful economic way
>>> when I'm in court battling everyone under the sun.
>>>
>>> This particular vision of "Libertarian Utopia" seems particularly stupid
>>> to me.
>>
>>
>> I see Brent's point, its hard for most individuals to have the sort of
>> generalist or multi-specialist knowledge required to be 'caveat 
>> emptoring'
>> every time they buy a product. And its also inefficient. And kids and
>> the vulnerable, (ie people who are largely harmless except perhaps in
>> that they vote) don't have the skills to be 'caveat emptoring' for
>> themselves especially when unscupulous sellers can specialise in
>> identifying classes of marks to exploit.
>>
>> Yet ultimatey I think Mike is more correct on this point. Rights don't
>> arrive from need alone. There is no and cannot be a general right to
>> ignorance.
>>
>> Earth is biosphere 1. Adults, voters anyway, are not equally equipped
>> to thrive in biosphere 1 and to make good personal use of the social
>> constructions and tools like governments, the legal system, the media,
>> but so long as we are all in biosphere 1, its just nuts to think that 
>> there
>> are ultimate rights to ignorance when the exercise of that ignorance
>> feeds back into the biosphere.
>>
>> Every fool that buys a crap product empowers a pest. The number
>> of pests then increases to feast on that particular species of fool.
>>
>> Hard as it is I also think that Mike is sort of correct about the
>> solution. Ultimately there is no real security in ignorance. To thrive
>> in biosphere 1 a person does have to be a geek of many trades.
>> One has to be lawyer enough to use the legal system, mathematician
>> enough to weight one's risks, politician enough to stay on side or
>> avoid getting offside with too many rougues and so on and on..
>>
>> And then if you actually want to make anything happen to improve
>> the circumstances of your life in biosphere 1 just have to expect
>> that their will be a tax on your creativity and innovation.
>>
>> Scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs are all accountable to
>> some degree to exogenous planning shocks every three of four
>> years when the voters vote in their wisdom or otherwise.
>>
>> While we are in bioshphere 1 there is no escaping the need to
>> educate and enlighten the voters other than to stop them from
>> voting.
>>
>> 'Extropy' in biosphere 1 has to deal with the fact that we are
>> in biosphere 1 with a bunch of other people, all things being
>> equal the faster those people get enlightened the better it
>> will be.  Educating other people when those people are going
>> to vote, and buy products, isn't a side issues its a design
>> necessity.
>>
>> Thoughts of getting rid of governments or imagining away
>> institutions will remain just thoughts, and probably should
>> remain just thoughts, until we realise that what exists in
>> biosphere 1, all the human constructions, exist as a result
>> of evolutionary pressures.
>>
>> The above is not necessarily thoroughly thought through.
>>
>> Brett Paatsch
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>