From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 1 02:26:20 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:26:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.co m> References: <200510300620.j9U6K5e04458@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051031204311.071e1cc0@unreasonable.com> Natasha asked: >Mike's list cannot be an Exi-Freedom because that would be an >infringement on ExI's name. Can you verify? and Russell Wallace replied: >It isn't, it's extro-freedom. The list *was* called exi-freedom, and was renamed to extro-freedom two years ago. At which occasion, Mike posted to that group: >Hey all, this change became necessary due to a polite request by Max >More that we not use the term "ExI", claiming a trademarked right to >that term. The new name for the group is "extro-freedom", which is >not much of a change, but enough to avoid any legal issues. I certainly welcome peaceable relations and courtesy within our community but neither Max nor Extropy Institute had or have any legally enforceable rights to "ExI". The reasons are many, but you can sanity-check this with a simple trademark search -- http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&p_lang=english&p_d=trmk Greg doesn't specialize in IP law, but he probably knows enough anyway to opine. *My* read is that the only way you could stop someone from using ExI in the name of a mailing list would be to make yourself a $cientology-grade pest until they or their list host gave in to make you go away. -- David. From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 1 02:52:29 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:52:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511010252.jA12qxe17773@tick.javien.com> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Natasha Vita-More ... Avant, Mike runs a libertarian-oriented Exi-freedom list, where heated political debate is the coin of the realm.? Mike's list cannot be an Exi-Freedom because that would be an infringement on ExI's name.? Can you verify?? Natasha Vita-More I googled and learned that Mike's site name was changed from exi-freedom at yahoo.com to extro-freedom at yahoo.com. I tried to get to that but it came up as page cannot be displayed. My understanding is the I in ExI is for Institute, with which Mike is not associated as far as I know. I did find this: http://intlib.blogspot.com/ spike From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 1 02:58:51 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:58:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] robugs In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511010259.jA12xve18528@tick.javien.com> If this pans out like the robot races, we can forget privacy henceforth: DARPA solicits proposals for insect-sized nano air vehicle program: Industry is being asked to take cues from the makeup of fluttering insects and hummingbirds, for a new Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program seeking to field a small unmanned aerial vehicle that could be used to breach interiors to transmit data without being detected. In an Oct. 25 solicitation, posted on the Federal Business Opportunities Web site, DARPA announced it is soliciting proposals for a Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program, that would produce a "very small, very lightweight" UAV. The agency said it envisions the NAV system to be based on conventional, as well as non-conventional air vehicle designs. More specifically, DARPA said the "wingspan" of the vehicle should be smaller than 3 inches, and the platform should weigh less than 10 grams and be able to travel three to seven meters per second. (Inside the Army) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Tue Nov 1 03:08:10 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:08:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] robugs In-Reply-To: <200511010259.jA12xve18528@tick.javien.com> References: <200511010259.jA12xve18528@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4366DC1A.30100@goldenfuture.net> Nahhhh... You just need to have your nano-swarm privacy 'bots upgraded with the latest anti-intrusion software. Joseph spike wrote: > If this pans out like the robot races, we can forget privacy henceforth: > > DARPA solicits proposals for insect-sized nano air vehicle program: > Industry is being asked to take cues from the makeup of fluttering > insects and hummingbirds, for a new Defense Advanced Research Projects > Agency program seeking to field a small unmanned aerial vehicle that > could be used to breach interiors to transmit data without being > detected. In an Oct. 25 solicitation, posted on the Federal Business > Opportunities Web site, DARPA announced it is soliciting proposals for > a Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program, that would produce a ?very small, > very lightweight? UAV. The agency said it envisions the NAV system to > be based on conventional, as well as non-conventional air vehicle > designs. More specifically, DARPA said the ?wingspan? of the vehicle > should be smaller than 3 inches, and the platform should weigh less > than 10 grams and be able to travel three to seven meters per second. > (Inside the Army) > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 1 03:46:51 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:46:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200511010252.jA12qxe17773@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <200511010252.jA12qxe17773@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051031224147.0705a008@unreasonable.com> Spike wrote: >I googled and learned that Mike's site name was changed from >exi-freedom at yahoo.com to extro-freedom at yahoo.com. I tried to get to >that but it came up as page cannot be displayed. A sensible browser response, since xxx at yyy is an email address, not a URL. The extro-freedom mailing list can be found at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extro-freedom/ >All Extropy, All the Time, til the Singularity. No posting limits, >no censorship outside of limiting fraudulent statements and personal >attacks (by the judgement of the ownership and management), no >topics off-limits, no political correctness. > >NOTE: This list is not operated by or approved by the Extropy >Institute. They are too politically correct for such a list. -- David. From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 1 05:09:03 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:09:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] cool, pluto has three moons In-Reply-To: <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <200511010509.jA159Ge30726@tick.javien.com> http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051031_pluto_moons.html From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 1 05:24:26 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:24:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <200511010524.jA15One31876@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Atkins > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty > > BillK wrote: > > > > So our magic machines will have to support a non-working population. > > How? Everybody on Social Security? > > > > No. Rather than everyone a worker for someone else... > > Why moan about having to work for some other factory owner, or losing your > job > to a robot, when you may be able to take advantage of rapidly increasing > technological-capability-per-buck to eventually own your own automated > hardware > or software that would allow you to operate your own company. > ... > > The time of complaining "I can't start a business because of..." is > ending... Brian Atkins Whoooooohoooo, I get so turned on with this kind of talk. He's absolutely right you know. I know of folks who have made a living out of nothing, merely buying antique motorcycles, taking them apart and selling the pieces on eBay. New parts cannot be had in most cases, or if so they cost a fortune. Guys that still have the old bikes need the parts. No particular expertise is needed, a decent small biz can grow out of a hobby. The pay isn't great in most cases, but higher than minimum wage, and doesn't require a "will work for food" sign. The internet has created new opportunities all over the place. One need not be a young person to jump on them. Capitalism, my friends, is the answer to poverty. Compare poor people in capitalistic nations with elsewhere. Notice the poor people in New Orleans. They looked pretty well fed, did they not? Competition breeds excellence. It doesn't make losers, everyone wins. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 1 05:36:59 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:36:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051031224147.0705a008@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <200511010537.jA15bwe00571@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of David Lubkin > Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:47 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents > > Spike wrote: > > >I googled and learned that Mike's site name was changed from > >exi-freedom at yahoo.com to extro-freedom at yahoo.com. I tried to get to > >that but it came up as page cannot be displayed. > > A sensible browser response, since xxx at yyy is an email address, not a > URL. The extro-freedom mailing list can be found at > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extro-freedom/ > ... > -- David. Hey Im a math geek, not a computer guy. Otherwise I would be rich. {8^D spike From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 06:15:13 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:15:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <200511010524.jA15One31876@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > Whoooooohoooo, I get so turned on with this kind of > talk. Yeah, me too. But I'm seriously suspicious. > He's absolutely right you know. "Absolutely'? Strong wording that. True believer stuff. Tread carefully. While the world is awash in opportunity, there are problems. I'll list three. Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train people to be economically savvy, to recognize the abundance of opportunity and to make it work for them. In the old days a son or daughter would be at their father or mother's side and learn the necessary life skills. Our culture has no plan -- our education system is an unfocused corrupted pile of crap -- for preparing people to be economically competent. When people succeed, they do so IN SPITE OF the culture's failure to do its duty and prepare them. Almost without exception the preparation for success comes from the family, from the individual realizing what he/she needs to do, or from blind luck. And the family influence is so crucial a factor, that economic incompetence (from which comes poverty) is virtually an inherited familial legacy. I wonder whether people see this, because to me it seems that successful people who know "how to get there from here" do it naturally, like breathing, without thinking and without realizing that it's something you need to know how to do. And unsuccessful people, the chronically indigent, are paralyzed by the absolute certainty that there IS NO WAY OUT, > I know of folks who > have made a living out of nothing, merely buying > antique motorcycles, taking them apart and selling the pieces on eBay. New parts cannot be had in most cases, or if so they cost a fortune. Guys that still have the old bikes need the parts. > > No particular expertise is needed, a decent small > biz can grow out of a hobby. The pay isn't great in > most cases, but higher than minimum wage, and doesn't > require a "will work for food" sign. The internet has created new opportunities all over the place. One need not be a young person to jump on them. > > Capitalism, my friends, is the answer to poverty. > Compare poor people in capitalistic nations with elsewhere. Notice the poor people in New Orleans. They looked pretty well fed, did they not? Competition breeds excellence. > It doesn't make losers, everyone wins. > > spike __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 06:19:38 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:19:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <200511010524.jA15One31876@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051101061938.21370.qmail@web60012.mail.yahoo.com> Please excuse, my finger slipped and I hit that key, whatever it is, that just sends out the email right out there, when I'm not finished yet. So now I'm gonna go back -- I hadn't even saved a first draft yet -- get the incomplete message, and continue. Thanks, Jeff Davis __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 07:34:18 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:34:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty Message-ID: <20051101073418.81204.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > Whoooooohoooo, I get so turned on with this kind of > talk. Yeah, me too. But I'm seriously suspicious. > He's absolutely right you know. "Absolutely'? Strong wording that. True believer stuff. Tread carefully. While the world is awash in opportunity, there are problems. I'll list three. Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train people to be economically savvy, to recognize the abundance of opportunity and to make it work for them. In the old days a son or daughter would be at their father or mother's side and learn the necessary life skills. Our culture has no plan -- our education system is an unfocused corrupted pile of crap -- for preparing people to be economically competent. When people succeed, they do so IN SPITE OF the culture's failure to do its duty and prepare them. Almost without exception the preparation for success comes from the family, from the individual realizing what he/she needs to do, or from blind luck. And family influence is so crucial a factor, that economic incompetence (from which comes poverty) is virtually an inherited familial legacy. I wonder whether people see this, because to me it seems that successful people who know "how to get there from here" do it naturally, like breathing, without thinking and without realizing that it's something you need to know how to do. And unsuccessful people, the chronically indigent, are paralyzed by the absolute certainty that there IS NO WAY OUT, **********here's where I left off******** **********so I'll continue********** nowhere in their experience is any success or training for success or any hint that success is possible ***FOR THEM***. Second, the economic world is very dynamic, constantly changing. The successful enterprise of yesterday may be a dead end today, and today's success may fade to unviabilty at any moment. Third, humans are despotic creatures. Given the least little chance, they will steal, cheat, or rig the system. To the legions of the corrupt (which is to say, potentially, all who are human), honest work is for suckers. This ancient problem is today alive and well and strappingly robust and penetrates to the very core of all things human. Most pointedly, the wealthy use their wealth to buy the government, which then makes rules to help them get wealthier at the expense of those who don't have their resources,... to buy the government. > I know of folks who > have made a living out of nothing, merely buying > antique motorcycles, taking them apart and selling the pieces on eBay. New parts cannot be had in most cases, or if so they cost a fortune. Guys that still have the old bikes need the parts. > > No particular expertise is needed, a decent small > biz can grow out of a hobby. The pay isn't great in > most cases, but higher than minimum wage, and doesn't > require a "will work for food" sign. The internet has created new opportunities all over the place. One need not be a young person to jump on them. > > Capitalism, my friends, is the answer to poverty. I absolutely agree,... except that capitalism has a dark side -- a side that caters to human despotism. Concentrations of wealth and power become a feedback loop of psychotic addiction, until megalomania and unbridled corruption turn the level playing field into a corpse-littered battlefield. This can be a commercial -- ie business is war -- battlefield with corpses in the form of the shattered lives of ruthlessly exploited workers, or a literal battlefield with literal corpses. Is this not clearly the record of history? The world of Johnny Rocco. (From the movie Key Largo, with Humphrey Bogart and Edward G. Robinson) A world of mafiosi who always want 'more' but who can never get enough. > Compare poor people in capitalistic nations with > elsewhere. Notice the poor people in New Orleans. > They looked pretty well fed, did they not? Shame on you, spike. I love you like a brother, but there is way more to life than a full belly. "...What is a man, If his chief good and market of his time Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Sure he that made us with such large discourse, Looking before and after, gave us not That capability and godlike reason To fust in us unus'd." > Competition breeds excellence. No honest man can compete with a mafiosi, without either being killed or becoming a mafiosi. > It doesn't make losers, everyone wins. If you have a system that protects the little guy from the depredations of the wealth-addicted despot, and is robustly armored against the unrelenting assault of the mafiosi in all of us, yes. But when the mafiosi take over, everyone loses. Best, Jeff Davis "No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." - P. J. O'Rourke __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 07:37:02 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:37:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty Message-ID: <20051101073702.86631.qmail@web60021.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > Whoooooohoooo, I get so turned on with this kind of > talk. Yeah, me too. But I'm seriously suspicious. > He's absolutely right you know. "Absolutely'? Strong wording that. True believer stuff. Tread carefully. While the world is awash in opportunity, there are problems. I'll list three. Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train people to be economically savvy, to recognize the abundance of opportunity and to make it work for them. In the old days a son or daughter would be at their father or mother's side and learn the necessary life skills. Our culture has no plan -- our education system is an unfocused corrupted pile of crap -- for preparing people to be economically competent. When people succeed, they do so IN SPITE OF the culture's failure to do its duty and prepare them. Almost without exception the preparation for success comes from the family, from the individual realizing what he/she needs to do, or from blind luck. And family influence is so crucial a factor, that economic incompetence (from which comes poverty) is virtually an inherited familial legacy. I wonder whether people see this, because to me it seems that successful people who know "how to get there from here" do it naturally, like breathing, without thinking and without realizing that it's something you need to know how to do. And unsuccessful people, the chronically indigent, are paralyzed by the absolute certainty that there IS NO WAY OUT, **********here's where I left off******** **********so I'll continue********** nowhere in their experience is any success or training for success or any hint that success is possible ***FOR THEM***. Second, the economic world is very dynamic, constantly changing. The successful enterprise of yesterday may be a dead end today, and today's success may fade to unviabilty at any moment. Third, humans are despotic creatures. Given the least little chance, they will steal, cheat, or rig the system. To the legions of the corrupt (which is to say, potentially, all who are human), honest work is for suckers. This ancient problem is today alive and well and strappingly robust and penetrates to the very core of all things human. Most pointedly, the wealthy use their wealth to buy the government, which then makes rules to help them get wealthier at the expense of those who don't have their resources,... to buy the government. > I know of folks who > have made a living out of nothing, merely buying > antique motorcycles, taking them apart and selling the pieces on eBay. New parts cannot be had in most cases, or if so they cost a fortune. Guys that still have the old bikes need the parts. > > No particular expertise is needed, a decent small > biz can grow out of a hobby. The pay isn't great in > most cases, but higher than minimum wage, and doesn't > require a "will work for food" sign. The internet has created new opportunities all over the place. One need not be a young person to jump on them. > > Capitalism, my friends, is the answer to poverty. I absolutely agree,... except that capitalism has a dark side -- a side that caters to human despotism. Concentrations of wealth and power become a feedback loop of psychotic addiction, until megalomania and unbridled corruption turn the level playing field into a corpse-littered battlefield. This can be a commercial -- ie business is war -- battlefield with corpses in the form of the shattered lives of ruthlessly exploited workers, or a literal battlefield with literal corpses. Is this not clearly the record of history? The world of Johnny Rocco. (From the movie Key Largo, with Humphrey Bogart and Edward G. Robinson) A world of mafiosi who always want 'more' but who can never get enough. > Compare poor people in capitalistic nations with > elsewhere. Notice the poor people in New Orleans. > They looked pretty well fed, did they not? Shame on you, spike. I love you like a brother, but there is way more to life than a full belly. "...What is a man, If his chief good and market of his time Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Sure he that made us with such large discourse, Looking before and after, gave us not That capability and godlike reason To fust in us unus'd." > Competition breeds excellence. No honest man can compete with a mafiosi, without either being killed or becoming a mafiosi. > It doesn't make losers, everyone wins. If you have a system that protects the little guy from the depredations of the wealth-addicted despot, and is robustly armored against the unrelenting assault of the mafiosi in all of us, yes. But when the mafiosi take over, everyone loses. Best, Jeff Davis "No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." - P. J. O'Rourke __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 1 08:23:11 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:23:11 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty References: <20051101073702.86631.qmail@web60021.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <032b01c5debd$7f7fbbf0$8998e03c@homepc> Jeff Davis wrote: > Third, humans are despotic creatures. Given the least > little chance, they will steal, cheat, or rig the > system. Saw this article supporting your thesis today: "Sad truth: we're a bunch of cheats" http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17097227%255E2702,00.html "AT least 50 per cent of people will cheat on tests if they think they can get away with it. A research report found most people were deterred from cheating only by a fear of getting caught, and almost everyone would cheat if the stakes were high enough." ----- Brett Paatsch [If I find something optimistic and upbeat relating to extropy I must remember to post that too. That stuff seems harder to find at present though, dunno if its contemporay reality or just *my* particular view of it that is gloomy. For others sake, I hope its the second. Spike said recently - we aren't in the dark ages, well that necessarily true from one standpoint, but damn, it can seem like it sometimes if one looks about a bit. This isn't meant to be an insult but I am not sure I know anyone that is more than fleetingly happy at present that is not also something of a dimwit. ] From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Nov 1 09:47:17 2005 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:47:17 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Always On - The Techno Sapiens Are Coming Message-ID: <470a3c520511010147l61d217ecv9ac5f5a45d926a93@mail.gmail.com> Always On - The Techno Sapiens Are Coming - The promise and peril of nanotechnology invite a closer look at its ethical implications. The author Dr. C. Christopher Hook, MD, quotes the conference proceedings on "Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance" as seminal documents for government sponsorship of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science/cybernetics to enhance human beings. Though Dr. Hook demonstrates a good understanding of the horizons opened by recent advances in NBIC: " *Many scholars are anticipating cyborg and nanotech enhancements as means of forestalling aging or even pursuing immortality. The possibilities belong mostly in the realm of science fiction right now, but they seem less and less improbable as the years go by *", he has a quite negative attitude. Referring to the debate on using technology "beyond therapy" for human enhancement, Dr. Hook writes: "*My hope is that those involved in this research will heed the wisdom of the report of the president's Council on Bioethics released last October, which examines the ethical and social meanings of using biotechnologies for purposes "beyond therapy." It is a statement appropriately skeptical of transhumanist and scientific utopianism *". My comment: I do not heed the wisdom of this report, which seems to me more like a statement inappropriately skeptical of progress, science and human values. We have been using technology to enhance our bodies for centuries. Reading glasses were one of the first examples, followed by dental implants, orthopedic prostheses, and countless other aids that have improved the quality of life of billions. Direct neural interfacing with computer systems, the ultimate step toward "seamless" interfacing by direct brain implants to which Dr. Hook refers, will be just one more step on the same road leading to better bodies, better minds, and a better life . As Dr. Hook says, such tools will move beyond therapy into augmentation, or enhancement, of "normal" individuals. As a humanist I affirm human values and think that whatever can improve the quality of life of people, without decreasing the quality of life of other people, is good and worth pursuing. As a transhumanist, I am in favor of using technology to improve our lives by overcoming the limitations of our bodies and minds. We do not wish humans to "*go gently into that good night*", and we do not think this will happen. On the contrary, we see technology enabled human enhancement as one more evolutionary step for our species. Humans will remain humans, but with vastly improved capabilities. I do not consider my frail body, short-lived and vulnerable to horrible diseases, as a defining feature of my human identity. What I do consider as defining features of my human identity are reason, curiosity, understanding, and love. So even when technology will permit " *tapping the contents of my mind and transfering them into the metallic lattices of a computer*", I will retain the really important aspects of my human nature. We want everyone to enjoy a better life: how can anyone be against? We find the answer in " *Embodiment is fundamental to our identity, designed by God, and sanctified by the Incarnation and bodily resurrection of our Lord*". So, this is just the old war of religious fundamentalists on reason, progress and humanist values. Sorry Dr. Hook, but I don't think embodiment is fundamental to my identity, and I am not sure if I believe in any God. If I did, mine would be a God of Love and not a God of Fear: a God who has given us a mind capable of understanding the universe, and using such understanding to improve our lives. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 1 11:05:45 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 03:05:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Oct 31, 2005, at 4:58 AM, BillK wrote: > > So our magic machines will have to support a non-working population. > How? Everybody on Social Security? > If our well-augmented future selves are not competitive relative to pure AIs and robots then some other arrangement will be needed. I hope at some point that we reach a high enough level of abundance that most physical necessities are easily available because they are "too cheap to meter" after MNT. Computational/information resources would also likely be ubiquitous and nearly unimaginably powerful. Medical care could easily be as cheap as a shot of nanobots and occasional software upgrades freely available on the Net. If that much is so then there would be no such thing as abject poverty in the sense of being homeless, lacking for food, and so on. There would also not be literal computational have-nots although there could well be some tools and capabilities that were not mass accessible. The big question is whether human beings are the type of beings who can create/open up to/live in this type of world. The situation with human starvation in the face of plenty of food production capacity doesn't seem a promising sign. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 1 11:16:29 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 03:16:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> On Oct 31, 2005, at 8:17 AM, Brian Atkins wrote: > BillK wrote: > >> So our magic machines will have to support a non-working population. >> How? Everybody on Social Security? >> > > No. Rather than everyone a worker for someone else, or everyone > getting free money dropped by government helicopters, I would > suggest considering the idea that more and more people need to > start considering becoming capitalists. > > Why moan about having to work for some other factory owner, or > losing your job to a robot, when you may be able to take advantage > of rapidly increasing technological-capability-per-buck to > eventually own your own automated hardware or software that would > allow you to operate your own company. In a capitalist model in today's sense exactly how would you earn any money to save up to own these tools if the relative value of your labor/skills was too low to gain any employment? How would you pay for more training or augmentation without any income source? > > Everyone, start saving up a down payment for your own robot crew > now. Eventually it'll be like buying a car. In the meantime try > running an Ebay business like the other million or so people that > already make a living there, or come up with some other way to take > advantage of currently available software, services, or new > hardware tech. I believe there are around half a million people who make a living on ebay but it is an interesting point in today's economy. But not far down the line you might be seriously outclassed by those who can afford the latest auction AI services. Not so far-fetched when online poker bots are today making it foolhardy for a mere human to play poker online. > > The time of complaining "I can't start a business because of..." is > ending. Excuses based on costs of equipment, software, or materials > are going to fall by the wayside. How do you figure? If all those fall by the wayside then why would I need to own a micro-fab to make a living? > Don't know how to administrate a company? There will be automated > software to handle it all. For free? If not see the questions at the beginning. > I think corporate size is trending smaller and smaller, the long > tail is growing. Almost everyone will have to consider being a part > of this trend eventually. Start thinking now. > Great advice but I am unsure everyone can actually use it. - samantha From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 1 11:39:18 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 22:39:18 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer><200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com><4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> Message-ID: <038901c5ded8$e4f8f3f0$8998e03c@homepc> Samantha Atkins wrote: > online poker bots are today making it foolhardy for a mere human to > play poker online. Really? I hadn't heard that. I'm not an online poker player. How good are the bots? Who profits when the bots win? Brett Paatsch From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 1 11:43:30 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 03:43:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:15 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > >> He's absolutely right you know. >> > > "Absolutely'? Strong wording that. True believer > stuff. Tread carefully. > > While the world is awash in opportunity, there are > problems. I'll list three. > > Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train > people to be economically savvy, to recognize the > abundance of opportunity and to make it work for them. > In the old days a son or daughter would be at their > father or mother's side and learn the necessary life > skills. Our culture has no plan -- our education > system is an unfocused corrupted pile of crap -- for > preparing people to be economically competent. When > people succeed, they do so IN SPITE OF the culture's > failure to do its duty and prepare them. Almost > without exception the preparation for success comes > from the family, from the individual realizing what > he/she needs to do, or from blind luck. And the > family influence is so crucial a factor, that economic > incompetence (from which comes poverty) is virtually > an inherited familial legacy. > > I wonder whether people see this, because to me it > seems that successful people who know "how to get > there from here" do it naturally, like breathing, > without thinking and without realizing that it's > something you need to know how to do. And > unsuccessful people, the chronically indigent, are > paralyzed by the absolute certainty that there IS NO > WAY OUT, > Few people, even ones making it just fine, really develop any financial sense at all much less develop and entrepreneurial mindset. I sure agree with you there. But how do we fix it from here? Telling ourselves that people can just pick a living off the Net assumes way toq much about what resources and skills most people have. It is easy to think about what we here who are self selected for more than average intelligence and imagination would/could do and think that of course the same thing is true of everyone else. Unfortunately that is not remotely the case. There are scenarios where there is NO WAY OUT without rewriting some rules or removing some obstacles. If the government requires you to get a license you can't afford to sell what you can do to those willing to pay then you are in fact a bit trapped. If you are young and just starting out with no real skills and the government forbids anyone to hire you for what your utterly untrained and never tested in a job labor is thought to be worth then you are a bit trapped. If you are homeless and you are required to have a fixed address to even get on many types of relief, much less to hold a job, then you are a bit trapped if you are homeless. If technology has moved along and your skills are obsolete and/or available much cheaper than you can stay afloat on and re-training is not available, not affordable or you just can't seem to hack the new stuff you could be a bit blocked. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 1 12:09:07 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 12:09:07 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051031093415.02af9780@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <20051030033328.91209.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031093415.02af9780@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: On 10/31/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > At 09:33 PM 10/29/2005, Avant wrote: > > Imagine my surprise when I discovered he had been > booted from the list by none other than Natasha. > > > Stuart, you are making a leap in judgment. I did not boot Mike off the > list. And I would appreciate you respecting the list rules and the decision > of its moderators for doing what is believed to be the right thing in > deference to all list members and ExI. Respect does not mean agreement, or even keeping ones mouth shut in public. So, for the record, I disagree with the moderators decision. If you have any complaints, email the Board of ExI directly at > info at extropy.org and the email will be forwarded to all Board members and > list moderators. > > If I have complaints, I'll air them here first - in public. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 1 12:15:12 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:15:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:43:30AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > If technology has moved along and your skills are obsolete and/or > available much cheaper than you can stay afloat on and re-training is > not available, not affordable or you just can't seem to hack the new > stuff you could be a bit blocked. There are no old programmers in IT. Exceptions prove the rule. (There are old hands in IT, but they're not programmers). I don't understand how retraining is being offered as an option if everyone at the bottom is in debt staying where they are, working three jobs at minimum wage. Most of us here are sheltered (or we wouldn't be here in the first place) but please don't extrapolate from a skewed sample. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 1 12:29:59 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 12:29:59 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] survey on fringe ideas: politics In-Reply-To: <58052957-B26E-454E-B0A0-BEE6B133DEB6@mac.com> References: <200510291800.j9TI09e23238@tick.javien.com> <4363DB76.2070301@lineone.net> <58052957-B26E-454E-B0A0-BEE6B133DEB6@mac.com> Message-ID: On 10/30/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > Do not confuse "certainty" with "absolute certainty". Science is > about producing and quantifying certainty. > > - s > > On Oct 29, 2005, at 1:28 PM, ben wrote: > > > Dirk: "There is no certainty, and without certainty there is only > > belief." > > > > This was said in irony, right? > > > > Cos the only thing which produces certainty is belief. Anyone with > > their eyes open should be able to see that there is no such thing > > as certainty. This is what science is all about. I'm stating the > > obvious here, aren't i? I sincerely hope so. > > There are only *beliefs*. The only possible argument is over the statistics. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Tue Nov 1 15:35:23 2005 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 09:35:23 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051031204311.071e1cc0@unreasonable.com> References: <200510300620.j9U6K5e04458@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051031204311.071e1cc0@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051101093204.04e4e688@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 08:26 PM 10/31/2005, you wrote: >I certainly welcome peaceable relations and courtesy within our >community but neither Max nor Extropy Institute had or have any >legally enforceable rights to "ExI". I disagree, and we *have* had advice from an IP attorney. >The reasons are many, but you can sanity-check this with a simple >trademark search -- > >http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&p_lang=english&p_d=trmk How does that prove your claim? You think that because several businesses have or are using "EXI' that we have no rights to ExI? That's mistaken. No one else that I checked is using it in a context that is likely to cause confusion with our organization. There are numerous companies called "Oracle", but you can bet that Larry Ellison would sue and win if another database company -- even another software company -- used that name. Max _______________________________________________________ Max More, Ph.D. max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org http://www.maxmore.com Strategic Philosopher Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org _______________________________________________________ From jpnitya at verizon.net Tue Nov 1 15:47:06 2005 From: jpnitya at verizon.net (Joao Magalhaes) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:47:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ROS and aging Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20051031155123.04e888d8@receptor.med.harvard.edu> Hi, Here are a couple of recent papers on ROS and aging that called my attention--hope this is not a repost. First of all, overexpression of glutamate-cysteine ligase extends lifespan in Drosophila by up to 50%: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16148000&query_hl=210 Glutamate-cysteine ligase is involved in glutathione synthesis, that can act as an antioxidant. The highest life-extension was due to overexpression in the brain, which is similar to previous results with SOD. So far, manipulations of the glutathione system in mice have failed to affect aging, but this particular genes has not been tested. In mammals, I believe the glutathione system mostly acts on oxidative defence in erythrocytes--though it has other functions. Mutations in these genes in humans have been associated with anemia but polymorphisms have been linked with myocardial infarction. This system could thus be similar to what we saw with catalase: overexpression leads to life-extension in Drosophila and, in mice, has a protective effect of cardiac disease but does not impact on the whole aging process. We'll see if they develop some similar model in mice. In the next paper they created a Drosophila strain with high levels of antioxidants and a lower production of ROS. Interestingly, the animals actually live less than controls: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15954861&query_hl=112 This seems to support the idea that ROS are not just damaging compounds, but essential biological molecules used in a myriad of functions. On this subject, I have a paper on ROS that could be of interest to some of you: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16226003&query_hl=116 Lastly, here's another recent paper showing that antioxidant protection does not correlate with longevity in rodents, in line with many other results suggesting that antioxidant protection is already optimized in mammals: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16087218&query_hl=112 Cheers, Joao --- Joao Pedro de Magalhaes, PhD Harvard Medical School, Dept. of Genetics 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur, Room 238 Boston, MA 02115 Telephone: 1-617-432-6512 http://www.senescence.info From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Nov 1 16:10:03 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:10:03 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: References: <20051030033328.91209.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031093415.02af9780@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051101094635.03051aa0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 06:09 AM 11/1/2005, Dirk wrote: >On 10/31/05, Natasha Vita-More ><natasha at natasha.cc> wrote: >At 09:33 PM 10/29/2005, Avant wrote: > >> Imagine my surprise when I discovered he had been >>booted from the list by none other than Natasha. > >Stuart, you are making a leap in judgment. I did not boot Mike off the >list. And I would appreciate you respecting the list rules and the >decision of its moderators for doing what is believed to be the right >thing in deference to all list members and ExI. > >Respect does not mean agreement, When people join the list, the extropy list asks them to agree to and follow list rules. >So, for the record, I disagree with the moderators decision. Sometimes I don't agree with moderators' decisions either, but I believe that the moderators are fair and equitable and review the circumstances carefully. >If you have any complaints, email the Board of ExI directly at >info at extropy.org and the email will be forwarded >to all Board members and list moderators. > >If I have complaints, I'll air them here first - in public. That's fine. Some people prefer to do it in private and sometimes it makes a bigger impression on the moderators if email is sent to them and the Board directly. This is most likely why list rules agreement state that complaints are to be sent to moderators. Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian at posthuman.com Tue Nov 1 16:41:46 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:41:46 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> Jeff Davis wrote: > > Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train > people to be economically savvy, I completely agree with that. I was thinking about it yesterday after I posted... was reminded of my high school experience, wherein I was forced as part of the curriculum to take some vocational classes. The choices were things like: typing, computer word processing, "home economics", drafting, wood shop. How many kids would choose a "business 101 + investing" choice if they had offered it? Why isn't something like this a standard offering in schools? -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From brian at posthuman.com Tue Nov 1 17:12:48 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 11:12:48 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> Message-ID: <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > > In a capitalist model in today's sense exactly how would you earn any > money to save up to own these tools if the relative value of your > labor/skills was too low to gain any employment? How would you pay for > more training or augmentation without any income source? I think living as a capitalist means you have to try and accumulate / maintain various forms of capital: money, equipment/software, social capital, training/art abilities, intellectual capital, etc. If you do so, you will find at some point you have enough that a business idea almost jumps out at you and demands doing. My advice at the bottom was essentially: get started now on doing that, while it /may/ still be easier to bootstrap from virtually nothing. I'm not really sure it will be harder in the future... that's a complex question to ponder. I wouldn't count on it being as relatively easy as it is now though. > > I believe there are around half a million people who make a living on > ebay but it is an interesting point in today's economy. But not far > down the line you might be seriously outclassed by those who can afford > the latest auction AI services. Not so far-fetched when online poker > bots are today making it foolhardy for a mere human to play poker online. Certainly. In fact there are a whole ton of companies and people who make their money supplying software tools and other services to Ebay sellers. This is a typical ecosystem developing. Compete within it, or find another niche. All this competition sounds offputting I guess to some folks, but the nice thing is if you can reach a high enough point (it's actually not that high), you can hire employees (or perhaps some form of AIs in the future) to run some or all the day to day stuff for you. It doesn't have to be a neverending effort on your part personally for eternity if you don't enjoy constant competition (although you should try and pick a nice that you enjoy working in - this is another advantage of being a capitalist vs. working for someone else). And of course most people hope to develop enough assets eventually to increase their flexibility to the point where they can retire. > >> > >> The time of complaining "I can't start a business because of..." is >> ending. Excuses based on costs of equipment, software, or materials >> are going to fall by the wayside. > > > How do you figure? If all those fall by the wayside then why would I > need to own a micro-fab to make a living? It may eventually reach a point where you can purchase an extremely cheap nano fab, feed it solar power and other bits from the local landscape, and you can live for near-free. That's not the scenario I'm pondering though. I'm looking at more of an intermediate scenario between here and there, where the support functions exist to allow anyone to "easily" launch almost any kind of company. "Easily" because it won't require the amounts of human staffing or all-encompassing knowledge that it may have required in the past. Increasing chunks will be automated in various ways, pre-encoded, pre-thought-out, click-pretty-graphics-to-run-your-biz. This is the ongoing GUI-ization of business. All this won't be free, and you will still need to get the ball rolling, but the price tag for all this will continue to decrease IMO. >> I think corporate size is trending smaller and smaller, the long tail >> is growing. Almost everyone will have to consider being a part of >> this trend eventually. Start thinking now. >> > > Great advice but I am unsure everyone can actually use it. > Well, if it continues to be easier and easier to run a business, then eventually almost everyone should be able to use it. If a function of this forum is attempting to get a handle on future developments, and if we think biz automation in all its forms will continue to increase, then again: start thinking now. -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From mail at harveynewstrom.com Tue Nov 1 17:36:38 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (mail at harveynewstrom.com) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 12:36:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Always On - The Techno Sapiens Are Coming In-Reply-To: <470a3c520511010147l61d217ecv9ac5f5a45d926a93@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520511010147l61d217ecv9ac5f5a45d926a93@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 writes: > Always On - The Techno Sapiens Are Coming - The promise and peril of > nanotechnology invite a closer look at its ethical > implications. > The author Dr. C. Christopher Hook, MD, quotes the conference proceedings on > "Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance" as seminal > documents for government sponsorship of nanotechnology, biotechnology, > information technology, and cognitive science/cybernetics to enhance human > beings. I thought this looked familiar. This posting has been appearing on the Internet for a couple of years now. The earliest posting I just found with Google is from 2003 in "Christianity Today". It is part of a collection of articles on Christianity and technology being used at the University of Toronto. - - -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 1 17:37:40 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:37:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <20051101173740.GF2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:12:48AM -0600, Brian Atkins wrote: > My advice at the bottom was essentially: get started now on doing that, > while it /may/ still be easier to bootstrap from virtually nothing. The cheapest way of starting up is to shuffle bits, not atoms, of course there's also where most of the competition is. > I'm not really sure it will be harder in the future... that's a complex I'm pretty sure it will be harder in the future. It is getting harder by the month. > question to ponder. I wouldn't count on it being as relatively easy as it > is now though. > > All this competition sounds offputting I guess to some folks, but the nice > thing is if you can reach a high enough point (it's actually not that > high), you can hire employees (or perhaps some form of AIs in the future) It doesn't have to be a future AI, lots of business processes which ordinary need a warm body in the loop are pretty automatable. Actually hiring people requires a steady flow of income, and is opening you up to liabilities (unless you're outsourcing to cheaper places, which has other dangers). > Well, if it continues to be easier and easier to run a business, then > eventually almost everyone should be able to use it. If a function of this > forum is attempting to get a handle on future developments, and if we think > biz automation in all its forms will continue to increase, then again: > start thinking now. Good advice, actually. If it's low risk, and you're prone to pessimism another one is: it's not too late. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 1 17:53:13 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 12:53:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051101125128.02f04ed8@gmu.edu> At 11:41 AM 11/1/2005, Brian Atkins wrote: >Jeff Davis wrote: >>Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to train >>people to be economically savvy, > >I completely agree with that. >I was thinking about it yesterday after I posted... was reminded of >my high school experience, wherein I was forced as part of the >curriculum to take some vocational classes. The choices were things >like: typing, computer word processing, "home economics", drafting, wood shop. >How many kids would choose a "business 101 + investing" choice if >they had offered it? Why isn't something like this a standard >offering in schools? This is an excellent, and I think deep question. Well worth pondering at length. Why indeed. Not only are there no courses to teach you how to invest in or run a business, they also teach little about how to be a savvy consumer. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From pharos at gmail.com Tue Nov 1 18:33:30 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:33:30 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> Message-ID: On 11/1/05, Brian Atkins wrote: > All this competition sounds offputting I guess to some folks, but the nice thing > is if you can reach a high enough point (it's actually not that high), you can > hire employees (or perhaps some form of AIs in the future) to run some or all > the day to day stuff for you. It doesn't have to be a neverending effort on your > part personally for eternity if you don't enjoy constant competition (although > you should try and pick a nice that you enjoy working in - this is another > advantage of being a capitalist vs. working for someone else). And of course > most people hope to develop enough assets eventually to increase their > flexibility to the point where they can retire. > But..... All our machines will be doing the work. There won't be competition anymore. Humans will be permanently retired. That was Spike's ideal scenario. It will be a future of hobbies, hairdressing, painting, interior designing, etc. BillK From brian at posthuman.com Tue Nov 1 18:47:28 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 12:47:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <4367B840.50709@posthuman.com> BillK wrote: > > But..... > All our machines will be doing the work. There won't be competition > anymore. Humans will be permanently retired. That was Spike's ideal > scenario. > > It will be a future of hobbies, hairdressing, painting, interior designing, etc. > Humans can't be fully retired/out of the loop until there are AGIs that surpass us. You're talking Singularity - beyond the scope of my discussion. Until then, humans, increasingly enhanced humans, will continue to pull the strings of the subhuman software. -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 1 20:26:53 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 15:26:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051101093204.04e4e688@pop-server.austin.rr.com > References: <200510300620.j9U6K5e04458@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051031204311.071e1cc0@unreasonable.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051101093204.04e4e688@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051101133704.072e3d40@unreasonable.com> Max wrote: >How does that prove your claim? You think that because several >businesses have or are using "EXI' that we have no rights to ExI? >That's mistaken. No one else that I checked is using it in a context >that is likely to cause confusion with our organization. You don't have a registered federal trademark for ExI, while in fact several other organizations do, including EXi Corp. For that matter, I see no registered federal trademarks owned by either Extropy Institute or Max More. (Although Extro is a registered trademark of Coca-Cola for carbonated fruit juice. Perhaps some could be obtained for the next conference.) The extropy.org web site does not claim any trade or service marks. >There are numerous companies called "Oracle", but you can bet that >Larry Ellison would sue and win if another database company -- even >another software company -- used that name. They also have substantial documented usage and assertion of trademark, deep financial pockets, and an SOB CEO. None of which the Extropy Institute has. The Oracle trademarks are worth billions, and they are in jeopardy if not actively protected. And yet there are 946 Yahoo groups devoted to Oracle, many using the word Oracle in their title, none authorized by Oracle Corporation. I'm glad the matter was settled amicably. But had you been more antagonistic to Mike, he could easily have gotten his dander up and refused. In which case, I'd have put long odds against you prevailing. -- David. From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 1 21:13:07 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:13:07 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <038901c5ded8$e4f8f3f0$8998e03c@homepc> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> <4366437E.7000502@posthuman.com> <1F10BA0B-104F-406D-9360-D6971F2B7318@mac.com> <038901c5ded8$e4f8f3f0$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: Below is a wired article about these. Many more are available from google. Presumably the winnings are collected by whoever owns the account hooked used by the bot player. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.09/pokerbots.html - samantha On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:39 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >> online poker bots are today making it foolhardy for a mere human >> to play poker online. >> > > Really? I hadn't heard that. I'm not an online poker player. > > How good are the bots? Who profits when the bots win? > Brett Paatsch > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 21:16:15 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:16:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <20051101211616.15605.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brian Atkins wrote: > Jeff Davis wrote: > > > > Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to > train > > people to be economically savvy, > > I completely agree with that. > > I was thinking about it yesterday after I posted... > was reminded of my high > school experience, wherein I was forced as part of > the curriculum to take some > vocational classes. The choices were things like: > typing, computer word > processing, "home economics", drafting, wood shop. > > How many kids would choose a "business 101 + > investing" choice if they had > offered it? Why isn't something like this a standard > offering in schools? Yes, exactly. This problem could be relatively easy to solve once recognized, seen as important, and a commitment made to correct the situation. The Head Start program serves as an excellent example. It sought to break that crucial family/microculture role in the continuity of poverty. A bedrock goal of the K-12 education system should be to graduate financially self-sustaining individuals, who have both short- and long-term economic savvy, and who are prepared to, without overmuch anxiety, revise their economic practices when "the winds of changes shift". Also, a similar program could be imbedded in the penal system. Wire up the prisons and then make it that no convict gets out till they have a running business that meets their financial needs. Nothing like going to sleep at night knowing everything is under control and the cops aren't after your ass, to take a bite out of crime. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From discwuzit at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 21:17:14 2005 From: discwuzit at yahoo.com (John B) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:17:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <200511011900.jA1J0Le01322@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051101211714.57786.qmail@web54505.mail.yahoo.com> Ick. Post-scarcity. I get all itchy whenever this comes up. *chuckle* Assuming perfect post scarcity, there'll still be things to compete over. Land - "Location, location, location!" still applies - there's only so much Maui beachfront. Mates, either sexual or whatever other form of mutual exchange you care for (tiddlywinks? Ideas? Crafts? Care?). Note that this also affects Land, as many such relationships presupposes a close physical proximity. There are potential technical limits to 'post-scarcity' as well - we've "only" got one systems' matter to play with, for instance, and some significant portion of that will be used up if we try to do something significantly different than letting it stay in its current orbits. Another include the amount of heat that the Earth can handle without damage (which is potentially conquerable with the 'right' tech mix, I admit) The competition doesn't have to be economic. There will probably be economics maintained - as a scoring system, if for nothing else - for a good long while after it's no longer needed. Power requires some form of keeping score, and power sets the rules - so there will continue to be 'tokens' of power, be that currency or nanofac capacity or template bandwidth or whatever the chits used are called. All this is theory on my part, and IMO dissembling - I don't think there can be such a thing as an 'economics of plenty'. That's not economics! *chuckle* Economics (to be a bit pedantic, sorry) is the study of choices made under limitation. If there are no limits, there is no economics. Dr Hanson, or other economic-savvy types out there - am I correct in that? -John B Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:33:30 +0000 From: BillK Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty But..... All our machines will be doing the work. There won't be competition anymore. Humans will be permanently retired. That was Spike's ideal scenario. It will be a future of hobbies, hairdressing, painting, interior designing, etc. BillK __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 22:04:43 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 14:04:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <20051101220443.46955.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brian Atkins wrote: > Jeff Davis wrote: > > > > Our culture does NOT make a focused effort to > train > > people to be economically savvy, > > I completely agree with that. > > I was thinking about it yesterday after I posted... > was reminded of my high > school experience, wherein I was forced as part of > the curriculum to take some > vocational classes. The choices were things like: > typing, computer word > processing, "home economics", drafting, wood shop. > > How many kids would choose a "business 101 + > investing" choice if they had > offered it? Why isn't something like this a standard > offering in schools? This is for several reasons. The biggest reason is that one of the economic theories on which the market is founded is the "bigger fool" theory. That is that whatever you happen to pay for a stock, there is presumably a bigger fool out there to willing to buy it from you at a higher price than you did. If everyone is educated in smart investment strategy, then there wouldn't be a large enough supply of fools to be left holding the bag when the bubble bursts. For all the talk about quality education by politicians in this country, much of public education system is dedicated to simply ensuring a steady supply of "consumers". The focus is not on building wealth but on "getting a job" that will allow the populace to make the minimum payments on the credit cards that they max out in response to slick Madison Ave. advertisements. After years of this, what do you have? A service economy or put another way, a nation of servants indentured to their Master Cards and having nothing worth selling except for their most valuable commodity of all, their all too finite time. And even that at the lowest possible rate else they will lose out to the hungry masses of the foreign labor markets. One of the early warning signs of the decline of the Roman Empire was that the common citizen was disenfranchised by the importation of slaves to do his job. The decline of America is instead presaged by disenfranchisement through the exportation of jobs to foreign labor markets. So any ideas on how this magical shift to a economy of plenty will happen with an economic theory based on the value of scarcity? SHOULD the water that flows in your veins and sustains your life be nearly valueless while a mint condition Action Comics #1 be worth a fortune? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 22:11:56 2005 From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 14:11:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SAO PAULO: November 3, 7:30 pm: Science, Religion and the Future of Humanity In-Reply-To: <20051101181101.25467.qmail@web32805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20051101221156.99382.qmail@web32808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear friends, I am looking forward to seeing you on Thursday, November 3, at the Willis Harman House for the presentation about Science, Religion and the Future of Humanity. Several recent short videos about computer to brain and to eye implants, and about robots will also be shown: www.willisharmanhouse.com.br Futuristically yours, La vie est belle! Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra, Solar System, Milky Way, Multiverse -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dmasten at piratelabs.org Tue Nov 1 22:21:04 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 14:21:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics, scarcity, and plenty Message-ID: <1130883664.2648.49.camel@dmlap> I'm new to the list, and I seem to have come in on a discussion of things that just don't make sense. "Economics of scarcity" and "economics of plenty" are meaningless to me. If we are talking about economics then I expect that the words used would be the terms of art for economics. The usual definition of economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources. Thus the phrase "economics of scarcity" is redundant, and the phrase "economics of plenty" is an oxymoron. Further, scarcity is a term of art within economics and has precise meaning that does not quite match the usual connotation. Per Samuelson and Nordhaus' textbook _Economics_: Scarcity is the distinguishing characteristic of an economic good. That an economic good is scarce does not mean it is rare, but only that it is not freely available for the taking. To obtain such a good, one must either produce it or offer other economic goods in exchange. Economic Good ? A good that is scarce relative to the total amount of it that is desired. It must therefore be rationed, usually by charging a positive price. Free Good ? Those goods that are not economic goods. Like air or seawater, they exist in such large quantities that they need not be rationed out among those who wish to use them. Thus their market price is zero. If by "economics of plenty" we are suggesting "studying the allocation of free goods" then there is nothing to study! There is no competition for the resource and thus no allocation to study. Changing goods from economic to free or vis-versa does not alter the principles of economics. In fact, air is not really a free good any longer. We have realized that the atmosphere is of limited quantity and that use of air for the disposal of industrial by-products is and must be an economic good, that is, it is an allocated resource for which there isn't enough to go to everyone in the quantities they desire. Dave From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 22:23:06 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 14:23:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051101211714.57786.qmail@web54505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20051101222306.38204.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com> --- John B wrote: > Ick. Post-scarcity. I get all itchy whenever this > comes up. *chuckle* > > Assuming perfect post scarcity, there'll still be > things to compete over. > > Land - "Location, location, location!" still applies > - > there's only so much Maui beachfront. Yes and no. Seven-tenths of the earths surface is covered in water. Build a duplicate of Maui, Malibu, San Francisco, Paris, etc, put it on a barge (a very large barge to be sure), and voila! Not only do you have more prime real estate, but it has more valuable waterfront than the original, and -- surprise, surprise -- it can be anywhere in the world you want it to be (like Santa Catalina is to L.A.), but moveable if that proves useful, as no doubt it would. > Mates, either sexual or whatever other form of > mutual > exchange you care for (tiddlywinks? Ideas? Crafts? > Care?). Note that this also affects Land, as many > such > relationships presupposes a close physical > proximity. > > There are potential technical limits to > 'post-scarcity' as well - we've "only" got one > systems' matter to play with, for instance, and some > significant portion of that will be used up if we > try > to do something significantly different than letting > it stay in its current orbits. This is your example of the limited resources of our system!!!??? By the time we approach a Kardeshev type I civilization we'll be doin' the post-singularity dance and this whole scarcity/abundance issue will be a museum piece akin to stone tools. > Another include the > amount of heat that the Earth can handle without > damage (which is potentially conquerable with the > 'right' tech mix, I admit) ...potentially conquerable with the 'right' tech mix, I agree. > > The competition doesn't have to be economic. There > will probably be economics maintained - as a scoring > system, if for nothing else - for a good long while > after it's no longer needed. > Power requires some form of keeping score, and power sets the rules... Which brings up the crucial question of power. It seems clear that power has always been correllated with wealth. However, we have seen in our time examples of countries becoming substantially wealthier. As this takes place, the distribution of wealth within these societies changes, middle-classes (a group with professional, managerial, and entreprenurial skills and substantially greater wealth than serfs/lower classes) expand and, with their greater wealth, begin to exercise greater political power. So what are the historic trends regarding the changing distribution of power? And what does this imply for the hypothetical future society with its hypothetical abundance? And lest we forget, this process is unrelentingly dynamic, so we're likely dealing with a continuously moving target. A dynamic transition, through stages, from the culture we have now to the culture (pre-singularity) "of abundance" and beyond. > - so there will continue to be 'tokens' of power, be that currency or nanofac capacity or template bandwidth or whatever the chits used are called. > > All this is theory on my part, And mine as well, (gulp!). > and IMO dissembling - > I don't think there can be such a thing as an > 'economics of plenty'. That's not economics! *chuckle* > > Economics (to be a bit pedantic, sorry) is the study > of choices made under limitation. If there are no > limits, there is no economics. > > Dr Hanson, or other economic-savvy types out there - > am I correct in that? > > -John B Best, Jeff Davis "We are every one an "idiot and moron" compared to what we seek to become." Samantha Atkins __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 23:03:50 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:03:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] economics, scarcity, and plenty In-Reply-To: <1130883664.2648.49.camel@dmlap> Message-ID: <20051101230350.75898.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> Welcome to the list, Dave. --- David Masten wrote: > I'm new to the list, and I seem to have come in on a > discussion of > things that just don't make sense. "Economics of > scarcity" and > "economics of plenty" are meaningless to me. Let me try to help out, speaking only for myself, of course. > If we are talking about economics then I expect that > the words used would be the terms of art for economics. The usual definition of economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources. > Scarcity is the distinguishing characteristic of > an economic good. > [defined as] not freely available for the taking. To > obtain such a good, one must either produce it or > offer other economic goods in exchange. > > Economic Good ? A good that is scarce relative to > the total amount of it that is desired. It must > therefore be rationed, usually by charging a > positive price. Now, from the above definitions, I take "positive price" to mean greater than zero, but otherwise unspecified. So, for the purpose of clarifying their meanings, in an "economics of scarcity" an automobile costs $40,000. In an "economics of abundance" it costs 40 cents. And, so there be no misunderstanding, that 40 cents is equally easy to come by under both economic regimes. So, in fact you're right. It's still, in a rigorous sense, an economics of scarcity, which as you say is really just economics, the scarcity being implied. However, within the context of this discussion, "economics of scarcity" and "economics of abundance" are intended (by me at least) to distinguish between two conditions of scarcity, of -- based on my example, and for discussion purposes only, it could be less or it could be more -- five orders of magnitude difference. I hope that's helpful. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 1 23:15:17 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:15:17 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> On Nov 1, 2005, at 4:15 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:43:30AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >> If technology has moved along and your skills are obsolete and/or >> available much cheaper than you can stay afloat on and re-training is >> not available, not affordable or you just can't seem to hack the new >> stuff you could be a bit blocked. >> > > There are no old programmers in IT. Exceptions prove the rule. > (There are old hands in IT, but they're not programmers). Exception prove that the "rule" is bogus nonsense like most over- generalizations. It is true I am more often called "Principle Architect" or "Computer Scientist" lately but I still design and implement systems. I have been doing so for 26 years. I am now 51. Some people might call that "old". After they pick themselves up from the ground we get on with business. :-) > > I don't understand how retraining is being offered as an > option if everyone at the bottom is in debt staying where they are, > working > three jobs at minimum wage. Most of us here are sheltered > (or we wouldn't be here in the first place) but please don't > extrapolate from a skewed sample. > True. - samantha From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 23:23:31 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:23:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] gm biodiesel 'em In-Reply-To: <200510310424.j9V4O8e28580@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051101232331.31620.qmail@web60012.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > I am told by a friend that knows from Russian cars > that the Italians taught the commies how to build > cars. Well, that explains a lot. Imagine that alternate multiverse where the Germans taught the Russions how to build cars. Scary. > So a modern Russian-built car is analogous > to a 1970s lower end Fiat, but more poorly built. We should task the Italians to help out all our adversaries. We should hire the Italians to provide crucial national security casus belli intelligence regarding the WMD activities of our adversa... er, well, maybe not. Best, Jeff Davis "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." Winston Churchill __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 23:46:55 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:46:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200510300556.j9U5uBe01530@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051101234655.50299.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > I am often seen going about with a bottle of > distilled water and a SCUBA tank. ... > spike Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water? Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have. Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water? Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes. Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without good reason. Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at, Jack. Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why, do you realize that seventy percent of you is water? Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord! Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids. Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously) Ripper: Are you beginning to understand? Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter) Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol? Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes. Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation of water? Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes. Ripper: Well, do you know what it is? Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no. Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? Best, Jeff Davis "We call someone insane who does not believe as we do to an outrageous extent." Charles McCabe __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From extropy at unreasonable.com Wed Nov 2 00:51:57 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 19:51:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051101193407.0694ef08@unreasonable.com> Samantha wrote: >>There are no old programmers in IT. Exceptions prove the rule. >>(There are old hands in IT, but they're not programmers). > >Exception prove that the "rule" is bogus nonsense like most over- >generalizations. It is true I am more often called "Principle >Architect" or "Computer Scientist" lately but I still design and >implement systems. I have been doing so for 26 years. I am now >51. Some people might call that "old". After they pick >themselves up from the ground we get on with business. :-) Ditto, although I'm a little younger and have been programming a little longer (32 years). I also know quite a few people in their fifties or sixties who work as individual contributors on programming teams. There is an abiding prejudice against hiring engineers over forty that has been around for at least half a century. Nonetheless, there are a lot of us out there. I do get grouchy when a headhunter or HR weenie who clearly has not read my resume asks me if I have any experience with, say, databases. (Yes, you moron. Since before you were born.) -- David. From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 2 03:20:29 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:20:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <20051101234655.50299.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511020320.jA23KZe27922@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 3:47 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents > > --- spike wrote: > > > I am often seen going about with a bottle of > > distilled water and a SCUBA tank. ... In response to a comment by Avantguardian that went something like: I live in Taxifornia where socialism is in the air we breathe and the water we drink. With all our environmental protection laws, I am confident that the masses will eventually be able to draw in a deep breath of pure fresh capitalism, and drink deeply of clean, pure unfettered commerce. Jeff wrote: > >...Do you realize that fluoridation is the most > monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we > have ever had to face? > > Best, Jeff Davis Oh dear no Jeff. The commies have much bigger plots than fluoridation, heh, that was small potatoes. Besides, it was the dentists behind this particular plot, but they may have been commie dentists. Gotta watch those commie dentists, can't trust 'em, ya know. {8^D Jeff, with regard to your comment regarding the failure of public education to prepare proles to run businesses, I can only agree. I went thru the public schools and an engineering degree, attending over 90% of the classes, yet I recall not a single mention of how to start and run a business. For that matter, I do not recall any council on how to be a smart consumer. I do not blame teachers for this: teachers are not business owners, nor did they major in business. I blame not the state: it offers only job training, not necessarily life training. To learn those kinds of lessons, one must go to private school. To learn business, you must go to a business school. To hear lectures by teachers who actually *know* from business, you need to go to a really expensive business school. Public schools are never going to do any of this. Fortunately, those who cannot afford expensive business schools have an acceptable option. They go to work for someone who has started a business. They work hard, they watch and learn, then some day they launch their own business, perhaps in direct competition with their former employers. Everyone wins: the employer gets, for a time, a hardworking and profitable servant, the servant gets a business education, the public gets two firms competing to serve where previously there was only one, driving down the price of the goods and services. The system works! Ahhhhhhh, life is goooood. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 2 03:45:26 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:45:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] free latvia website In-Reply-To: <4367A210.2000203@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <200511020345.jA23jqe30781@tick.javien.com> Amara wrote: http://www.amara.com/Independence/LestWeForget.html Amara! Honest to evolution this website is a masterpiece. Direct, honest, uncomplicated, informative and so moving! spike From marc.geddes at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 04:16:15 2005 From: marc.geddes at gmail.com (Marc Geddes) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 17:16:15 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Some good advice from the Chronicle I've been following ; ) Message-ID: <7a5e56060511012016u2faab798w1601cf1faeddfa75@mail.gmail.com> "If you wish to be a prophet, first you must dress the part. No more silk ties or tasseled loafers. Instead, throw on a wrinkled T-shirt, frayed jeans, and dirty sneakers. You should appear somewhat unkempt, as if combs and showers were only for the unenlightened. When you encounter critics, as all prophets do, dismiss them as idiots. Make sure to pepper your conversation with grandiose predictions and remind others of your genius often, lest they forget. Oh, and if possible, grow a very long beard." http://chronicle.com/temp/email.php?id=nutzxlssedfcgkchkasn6vsmfiau1s1e -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Wed Nov 2 05:10:55 2005 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 00:10:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051101125128.02f04ed8@gmu.edu> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20051101125128.02f04ed8@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <43684A5F.9000104@mydruthers.com> Brian wrote: >> I was reminded of my high school experience, wherein I was forced >> as part of the curriculum to take some vocational classes. The >> choices were things like: typing, computer word processing, "home >> economics", drafting, wood shop. >> >> How many kids would choose a "business 101 + investing" choice if >> they had offered it? Why isn't something like this a standard >> offering in schools? Robin responded: > This is an excellent, and I think deep question. Well worth > pondering at length. Why indeed. Not only are there no courses to > teach you how to invest in or run a business, they also teach little > about how to be a savvy consumer. Less true now than when we went to school, Robin. I'm in Virginia (visiting Robin's group at GMU, actually) and staying with my sister. Her husband teaches high school business and economics. Over dinner, he was telling us about the classes he has in which they are running mock businesses. They're learning about business plans, opportunity costs, managing employees, budgeting, and a lot more. I went to high school about 20 miles from here, and there wasn't anything like it at the time. He also used to run a computer consulting business, and so he teaches their computer courses as well. As far as I can tell, that doesn't get beyond the basics of using office applications and building web sites, but that's a good start. They're teaching some of the stuff we think matters to some of the kids. It's hard to tell how many of them are taking it seriously, but I think the fact that some of the kids are getting it means that the terminology and the ideas are seeping into their culture. Chris -- C. J. Cherryh, "Invader", on why we visit very old buildings: "A sense of age, of profound truths. Respect for something hands made, that's stood through storms and wars and time. It persuades us that things we do may last and matter." Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://pancrit.org From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 2 07:48:07 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 08:48:07 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051102074807.GV2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:15:17PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Exception prove that the "rule" is bogus nonsense like most over- > generalizations. It is true I am more often called "Principle > Architect" or "Computer Scientist" lately but I still design and > implement systems. I have been doing so for 26 years. I am now > 51. Some people might call that "old". After they pick themselves > up from the ground we get on with business. :-) Yes, you're an exception, not the rule. Very few people can stay at the technical cutting edge that long. Current IT is novelty-driven, and has crazy working hours. Buzzword compliance and ability to pull overtime drive out the old. It's a blue-collar occupation. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 2 09:31:04 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 01:31:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051102074807.GV2249@leitl.org> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> <20051102074807.GV2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <310CC182-E3C2-45FA-93C3-76774005ADCC@mac.com> On Nov 1, 2005, at 11:48 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:15:17PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >> Exception prove that the "rule" is bogus nonsense like most over- >> generalizations. It is true I am more often called "Principle >> Architect" or "Computer Scientist" lately but I still design and >> implement systems. I have been doing so for 26 years. I am now >> 51. Some people might call that "old". After they pick themselves >> up from the ground we get on with business. :-) >> > > Yes, you're an exception, not the rule. Very few people can stay > at the technical cutting edge that long. Current IT is novelty-driven, > and has crazy working hours. Buzzword compliance and ability > to pull overtime drive out the old. It's a blue-collar occupation. I thought I was cynical. :-) Somehow I have managed to find myself in a lot of places that had other people as old as I doing a lot of the most critical work. So much of the new buzz is little more than old ideas wearing a new ill fitting party dress. Undressed it turns out all too often to be all too familiar. That is depressing. A few actually new things come along now and then and can benefit from good design and implementation. All the overtime in the world will not keep a fundamentally flawed idea or execution of the idea running. Those who can see how it will play out early and avoid dead ends have value. But Cassandras don't win many popularity contests. I seem to have a nose for good design. I can't always explain how I do what I do. I am quite discouraged with the state of the industry. In the beginning I saw so many bright things that could be done along with many key questions that would need answers. So much is still not seen by the software industry much less resolved. We stay busy polishing turds (CRUD?) with the latest over-hyped and relatively valueless polish and techniques. I occasionally push past commercial state-of-the-art out of boredom and frustration. After my first rejuve I think I will get a PhD and hang out in academia. That might fit me better. - samantha From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 13:21:51 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 13:21:51 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200511020320.jA23KZe27922@tick.javien.com> References: <20051101234655.50299.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <200511020320.jA23KZe27922@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/2/05, spike wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis > > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 3:47 PM > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents > > > > --- spike wrote: > > > > > I am often seen going about with a bottle of > > > distilled water and a SCUBA tank. ... > > In response to a comment by Avantguardian that > went something like: I live in Taxifornia where > socialism is in the air we breathe and the water > we drink. > > LOL! US 'socialism' is what we Europeans call rabid right wing government. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ARTILLO at comcast.net Wed Nov 2 14:49:37 2005 From: ARTILLO at comcast.net (ARTILLO at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 14:49:37 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Drug discovery software Message-ID: <110220051449.29771.4368D2000008D35C0000744B2200734748B1B4B4B7ABADBE@comcast.net> I thought this was interesting enough to pass on.... - Arti news release from Laboratorytalk.com ____________________________________________________________ SOFTWARE 'WILL IRREVOCABLY CHANGE' DRUG DISCOVERY ____________________________________________________________ Date: 28 October 2005 News from: Quantum Pharmaceuticals Product: Quantum 3.1 http://www.laboratorytalk.com/news/qan/qan104.html Quantum Pharmaceuticals is issuing its first commercial release of research software that it says is expected to speed up pharma R and D radically and irrevocably change the drug discovery software market. Quantum 3.1 is a suite of drug discovery software for Linux and Windows designed to enhance stages of drug discovery workflows, such as target identification, drug hit identification, lead identification and lead optimisation. The Quantum software was developed using a new paradigm in molecular modelling - applying quantum and molecular physics instead of statistical scoring-function-like and Qsar-like methods. The key benefit of Quantum is the outstanding precision of molecular modeling and calculations, says the company. Using Quantum 3.1, researchers can calculate the IC50 of protein-ligand and protein-protein complexes, perform ligand docking, perform virtual screening of small-molecule libraries, analyse large-scale protein movements, perform de novo drug design and calculate the solvation energy and solubility. Quantum 3.1 also helps detect potential moderate-to-serious adverse activity, additional unexpected activity and broad relative selectivity for a library of compounds by screening them against several hundred Adme/Tox-associated proteins. The Mutagenesis module of Quantum 3.1 provides an interface for changing the protein sequence at specific sites through alterations to its amino acids and predicts changes in the bioactivity after mutations. The Quantum software was successfully applied in different in-house and collaborative drug discovery projects of Quantum Pharmaceuticals. As a result of applying Quantum software, the range of the novel chemical inhibitor classes were discovered for disease targets, including HIV-I integrase (Aids), Beta-Secretase (Alzheimer's disease), Human Neutrophil Elastase (CF, COPD), FtsZ (TB) and some others. Quantum technology has demonstrated itself to be very effective in creating revolutionary new medicine, and it has demonstrated its ability to discover new classes of inhibitors, says the company. The free demo version of Quantum 3.1 can be downloaded from Quantum's website. Quantum Pharmaceuticals says it serves the life sciences industry and research community by providing top-of-the-line drug discovery products and services. Since 2002 Quantum Pharmaceuticals has been developing its proprietary computer-based molecular modelling technology. It says the Quantum technology includes the latest achievements in the fields of physics, mathematics and chemistry. It demonstrates outstanding speed and accuracy of affinity calculations using fast quantum calculations which take into account the full flexibility of molecules, solvation effects and entropy contribution. This provides unprecedented possibilities for drug discovery. The headquarters of Quantum Pharmaceuticals is in Moscow, and its worldwide distribution network is expanding. For a brochure or catalogue on this product, please email mailto:courtney.ranson at q-pharm.com (Please mention Laboratorytalk when requesting more information from Quantum Pharmaceuticals) Quantum Pharmaceuticals Moscow, Russia Telephone: (Russia) +7 095 152 9615 Fax: (Russia) +7 095 152 1739 Website: http://www.q-pharm.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 2 14:53:54 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 06:53:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents > > --- spike wrote: > > > I am often seen going about with a bottle of > > distilled water and a SCUBA tank.??... In response to a comment by Avantguardian that went something like: I live in Taxifornia where socialism is in the air we breathe and the water we drink. LOL! US 'socialism' is what we Europeans call rabid right wing government. Dirk I have always been a fan of rabies. {8^D Dirk, which country are you from? I am interested in European politics to see how you guys solve the pension problem. We yanks have a social security fund that is supposed to go bust in 2038, but I heard Germany and France are facing a similar sitch with more urgency. I don't know that either right or left has a good solution to this. If so I haven't heard it. spike From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Nov 2 16:06:47 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 08:06:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics, scarcity, and plenty In-Reply-To: <20051101230350.75898.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> References: <1130883664.2648.49.camel@dmlap> <20051101230350.75898.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511020806j568acf28vf20f09b33d4ad238@mail.gmail.com> On 11/1/05, Jeff Davis wrote: > Welcome to the list, Dave. > > --- David Masten wrote: > > > I'm new to the list, and I seem to have come in on a > > discussion of > > things that just don't make sense. "Economics of > > scarcity" and > > "economics of plenty" are meaningless to me. > > Let me try to help out, speaking only for myself, of > course. Let me contribute my own perspective as well. I think we could all agree that scarcity and abundance can be seen as the two extremes of a single scale. And we have plenty of examples showing generally that no matter what our actual place on that scale, we tend to think in terms of scarcity. We evolved under conditions of scarcity and fierce competition for survival, and it's our nature to perceive and behave in those terms. But what happens when the conditions of our environment improve to the level that our basic needs are met? Similar to Mazlow's hierarchy, we might be expected to move our focus from survival to "self-actualization", or in the domain of economics from alleviating scarcity to maximizing growth, or in the domain of politics from striving for zero-sum social power to striving for win-win social frameworks. It's still the same scale, but the focus is changed to better match the environment, and the nature of the actions reflect that change. As others have pointed out, we will still compete: for attention, mind-share, more successful ideas winning over those less successful, but the focus will be qualitatively and substantially different. There will still be a leading and tailing edge of relative scarcity and relative abundance, and as the the Red Queen said, "to stay in place you have to run very, very hard, and to get anywhere, you have to run even harder." - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net From extropy at unreasonable.com Wed Nov 2 16:37:00 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:37:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics, scarcity, and plenty In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511020806j568acf28vf20f09b33d4ad238@mail.gmail.co m> References: <1130883664.2648.49.camel@dmlap> <20051101230350.75898.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511020806j568acf28vf20f09b33d4ad238@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051102110950.065c3f30@unreasonable.com> Jef Allbright wrote: >But what happens when the conditions of our environment improve to the >level that our basic needs are met? > : >It's still the same scale, but the focus is changed to better match >the environment, and the nature of the actions reflect that change. >As others have pointed out, we will still compete: for attention, >mind-share, more successful ideas winning over those less successful, >but the focus will be qualitatively and substantially different. Part of what's being ignored in this iteration of a perennial thread is that our concept of "basic needs" has changed throughout human history and will continue to do so. Is the need for food or for parasite-free, non-rancid food? Is health care a need? At what level of care? Not dying in childbirth due to sepsis or not dying ever? Clothing? Education? Enough warmth at night to not freeze, not shiver, or sleep comfortably? Economics will both describe our interaction over all Maslovian levels in an MNT future and the continued material scarcity in such an existence. Natasha wants to transform Iapetus into a sculpture but Amara hasn't finished studying it. Robert wants to add on to his Matrioshka brain while Keith wants to send out a quintillion or so copies of himself to explore the universe. -- David. From xyz at iq.org Wed Nov 2 17:39:09 2005 From: xyz at iq.org (Julian Assange) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 04:39:09 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051102074807.GV2249@leitl.org> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <7E425436-2A14-4B22-BDF8-D05888C1D350@mac.com> <20051101121512.GJ2249@leitl.org> <11B86625-8304-4517-8B3D-28DBB9769AB2@mac.com> <20051102074807.GV2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <1130953149.25457.246599717@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 08:48:07 +0100, "Eugen Leitl" said: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:15:17PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > Exception prove that the "rule" is bogus nonsense like most over- > > generalizations. It is true I am more often called "Principle > > Architect" or "Computer Scientist" lately but I still design and > > implement systems. I have been doing so for 26 years. I am now > > 51. Some people might call that "old". After they pick themselves > > up from the ground we get on with business. :-) > > Yes, you're an exception, not the rule. Very few people can stay > at the technical cutting edge that long. Current IT is novelty-driven, > and has crazy working hours. Buzzword compliance and ability > to pull overtime drive out the old. It's a blue-collar occupation. It has for a lot of people been declasse. What really seems to seperate blue-collar work from professions is that the latter involves manipulation of human perception. The result being that long term success is more about how well you relate to other people than how well you can perform technically. There's no simple performance metric for doctors, lawyers, academics or businessmen -- its all about perception control. From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 17:49:42 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 17:49:42 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> References: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/2/05, spike wrote: > > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere > > > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents > > > > --- spike wrote: > > > > > I am often seen going about with a bottle of > > > distilled water and a SCUBA tank.... > > In response to a comment by Avantguardian that > went something like: I live in Taxifornia where > socialism is in the air we breathe and the water > we drink. > > LOL! > US 'socialism' is what we Europeans call rabid right wing government. > > > I have always been a fan of rabies. > > {8^D > > Dirk, which country are you from? I am interested England in European politics to see how you guys solve the > pension problem. We yanks have a social security > fund that is supposed to go bust in 2038, but I > heard Germany and France are facing a similar > sitch with more urgency. > > I don't know that either right or left has a > good solution to this. If so I haven't heard it. > > There is the incredibly obvious solution of raising or abolishing the retirement age for state pensions. The alternative is importing tens of millions of immigrants. However, one study for the UK showed that to maintain a suitable 'pensions demographics' our population would have to double over the next 40yrs from 60m to 120m. Anyway, my Transhumanist belief is that within 20-30yrs lifespan will have been radically extended and the idea of people retiring at 60 and spending the next 200+yrs on a state pension (or almost any other for that matter) is ludicrous. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Nov 2 20:04:36 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 14:04:36 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Since I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an interview with a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures politics as 4 points: 1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party today advocates solutions for the world's most immediate issues. 2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line between conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is the best position to take when addressing what the world needs to focus on in the coming decades. 3. Futures Strategy. Designing strategic analysis of issues that society faces and producing alternative "futures" for society to review before voting. The Futures Strategy would provide the means for people - anywhere and at anytime - to learn about issues, possible options for dealing with and solving problems, and to voice their own opinions through a time-efficient and cost-effective P2P architecture. 4. Encouragement of critical thinking. In order to understand issues society needs to be skilled at critical thinking. Thoughts? N Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 21:39:57 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 21:39:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/2/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > Since I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an > interview with a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures > politics as 4 points: > > 1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party today advocates > solutions for the world's most immediate issues. > > 2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line between > conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is the best > position to take when addressing what the world needs to focus on in the > coming decades. > > 3. Futures Strategy. Designing strategic analysis of issues that society > faces and producing alternative "futures" for society to review before > voting. The Futures Strategy would provide the means for people - anywhere > and at anytime - to learn about issues, possible options for dealing with > and solving problems, and to voice their own opinions through a > time-efficient and cost-effective P2P architecture. > > 4. Encouragement of critical thinking. In order to understand issues > society needs to be skilled at critical thinking. > > Thoughts? Item 1 is a non starter. As long as different people have conflicting interests, or wish to solve a particular problem using different methods, there will be partisan politics. Item 2 - If by left/right is meant community/individual focus then it will never be transcended. Item 3 - This only works if there is a true meritocracy - not democracy. OTOH people can voice their opinions now, except nobody is obliged to listen. Item 4 - A lot more than critical thinking is required. Educational standards in general must rise significantly. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Nov 3 01:00:00 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 19:00:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102185617.04528bf0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 03:39 PM 11/2/2005, you wrote: >On 11/2/05, Natasha Vita-More ><natasha at natasha.cc> wrote: >Since I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an >interview with a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures >politics as 4 points: > >1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party today advocates >solutions for the world's most immediate issues. > >2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line between >conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is the best >position to take when addressing what the world needs to focus on in the >coming decades. > >3. Futures Strategy. Designing strategic analysis of issues that society >faces and producing alternative "futures" for society to review before >voting. The Futures Strategy would provide the means for people - >anywhere and at anytime - to learn about issues, possible options for >dealing with and solving problems, and to voice their own opinions through >a time-efficient and cost-effective P2P architecture. > >4. Encouragement of critical thinking. In order to understand issues >society needs to be skilled at critical thinking. > >Thoughts? > > >Item 1 is a non starter. In your view. >As long as different people have conflicting interests, or wish to solve a >particular problem using different methods, there will be partisan politics. I don't think so. People can pick and choose what works from different platforms. I have been doing this for years and never voting a party ticket. The point is that not having to vote a party ticket ought to be a statement in itself. >Item 2 - If by left/right is meant community/individual focus then it will >never be transcended. I have no idea what you are talking about. >Item 3 - This only works if there is a true meritocracy - not democracy. >OTOH people can voice their opinions now, except nobody is obliged to listen. No, you are incorrect. >Item 4 - A lot more than critical thinking is required. Educational >standards in general must rise significantly. Yes, indeed. This is sorely needed and may not even be wanted. Neither is change, but people have to do it anyway. Thanks for your comments even though I do not agree with you. N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com Tue Nov 1 18:11:01 2005 From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:11:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SAO PAULO: November 3, 7:30 pm: Science, Religion and the Future of Humanity Message-ID: <20051101181101.25467.qmail@web32805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear friends, I am looking forward to seeing you on Thursday, November 3, at the Willis Harman House for the presentation about Science, Religion and the Future of Humanity. Several recent short videos about computer to brain and to eye implants, and about robots will also be shown: www.willisharmanhouse.com.br Futuristically yours, La vie est belle! Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra, Solar System, Milky Way, Multiverse -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Thu Nov 3 03:25:44 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 22:25:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <43698338.4040701@goldenfuture.net> Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Since I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an > interview with a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures > politics as 4 points: > > 1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party today advocates > solutions for the world's most immediate issues. I see you not advocating a "nonpartisan" approach here so much as wishing there was a new party to which you could adhere. As in, if there were a party that did "advocate solutions for the world's most immediate issues", you would be willing to support it. Even supporting Dirk's nascent party is a form of "partisanship" in that sense. > > 2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line > between conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is > the best position to take when addressing what the world needs to > focus on in the coming decades. I tend to agree. (Although I should point out that I think Dirk in his response was speaking to the idea that traditionally the political Left advocates the interests of the State over the Individual, and traditionally the Right advocates the reverse, in his rather terse reply to you, which you didn't seem to understand.) I think that politics in the future will transcend these pre-French Revolution ideas and move to something else. What that will be, I cannot say, and I daresay none of us can, inasmuch as we will (if our aspirations come to fruition) be several orders of magnitude more intelligent than we are today, and our current political views will seem as quaint to us then as our opinions in kindergarden seem to us today as adults. > > 3. Futures Strategy. Designing strategic analysis of issues that > society faces and producing alternative "futures" for society to > review before voting. The Futures Strategy would provide the means > for people - anywhere and at anytime - to learn about issues, possible > options for dealing with and solving problems, and to voice their own > opinions through a time-efficient and cost-effective P2P architecture. This presupposes two things. 1) That the democratic ideal of a well-informed electorate is superior to the decision-making process achieved by experts in the matter at hand, and, 2) a well-informed electorate is something which is achievable on a practical level. Ignorance of complex issues notwithstanding, we are faced with the fact that most people simply don't care enough to cast a vote, and most of those who do, do so on the basis of ill-defined party loyalties. I direct your attention to the upcoming elections here in the US next Tuesday, which I predict will see as dismal a turnout as any in recent memory (with the possible exception of California, which is seeing a LOT of money being poured into the ballot measures offered in the special election), because people just don't care. > > 4. Encouragement of critical thinking. In order to understand issues > society needs to be skilled at critical thinking. This I wholeheartedly agree with, but you run smack-dab into the face of various religious interests, which considering they comprise 90+% of the population here in the United States, renders this a less-than-optimal strategy, at least here. Look no farther than the renewed debate about evolution, for crying out loud. Africa and Asia seem to be even worse. Perhaps in Europe... > > Thoughts? > > N In the most general sense, we cannot by definition know what posthuman politics will be like, any more than an australopithicus could know what the World Cup would be like. It is also clear that no political ideology is currently aimed at bringing about a posthuman ideology, with any realistic chance of success. Forming a political party with that express purpose seems somewhat premature. What we must do, it seems to me, is to lay the groundwork so that such a movement is seen as inevitable, and be prepared to act as its vanguard, ideologically if nothing else, organizationally if possible. It all comes down to a single question. Does Posthumanity need us? If yes, we need to get organized and get things moving, because there are forces which actively and effectively oppose us. If no, if market forces for human enhancement will inevitably trump the political triumphs of the Leon Kass's and Francis Fukyama's of the world, then just sit back and enjoy the ride. Personally, I reluctantly admit the former scenario to be much more likely. Joseph From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 3 04:07:09 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 20:07:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <43698338.4040701@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <200511030407.jA347Ae22700@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Bloch ... > ...if market forces > for human enhancement will inevitably trump the political triumphs of > the Leon Kass's and Francis Fukyama's of the world, then just sit back > and enjoy the ride. ... > > Joseph Market forces will eventually smash thru any law. There is a steady market for recreational drugs. All attempts to stop it thru legal means have failed. If human enhancement can be done profitably, there is no need to bother with the politics; it will happen anyway. spike From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 3 05:12:08 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 15:42:08 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Geowanking Message-ID: <710b78fc0511022112sdb22be3i@mail.gmail.com> Australians will be scratching out their eyes in horror at this subject line, but apparently this is the name of a list for elite GPS and mapping enthusiasts. I just had to mention it, maybe some of my fellow Aussies can describe what it suggests to them? Our cultures (Aussies and generic US internet) are so close, but there is the odd catastrophic disconnect. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 3479 (http://nanowrimo.org) From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 3 05:21:24 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 23:21:24 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Geowanking In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511022112sdb22be3i@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0511022112sdb22be3i@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051102231846.01c89490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:42 PM 11/3/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >Australians will be scratching out their eyes in horror at this >subject line, but apparently this is the name of a list for elite GPS >and mapping enthusiasts. I was horrified enough when I first heard of the Wankel engine. Aussies will also be bemused by the title of the forthcoming crime novel by me and Rory Barnes (PointBlank Press, some month, 200n): I SUPPOSE A ROOT'S OUT OF THE QUESTION. Damien Broderick From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Nov 3 08:30:30 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 00:30:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <200511030407.jA347Ae22700@tick.javien.com> References: <200511030407.jA347Ae22700@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: I don't think just sitting back in good enough! For how much human misery will we sit back and "enjoy the ride"!? Enough misery of the wrong types could lead to catastrophic outcomes that put our fond dreams out of reach for generations. In the US we have 2.3 million in prison I heard very recently. More than any country. More than any country on a per capita basis ever in history. I have heard that around 60% nationwide are in on drug charges, most for simple possession. After decades of such hate-filled abuse it still continues. When will it end? How can we get off our duffs and go be beyond our self-satisfied dreamy assurances in order to end it? - samantha On Nov 2, 2005, at 8:07 PM, spike wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Bloch >> > ... > >> ...if market forces >> for human enhancement will inevitably trump the political triumphs of >> the Leon Kass's and Francis Fukyama's of the world, then just sit >> back >> and enjoy the ride. >> > ... > >> >> Joseph >> > > > Market forces will eventually smash thru any law. There > is a steady market for recreational drugs. All attempts > to stop it thru legal means have failed. If human enhancement > can be done profitably, there is no need to bother with > the politics; it will happen anyway. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 3 08:46:44 2005 From: bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk (bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 08:46:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Proactionary in court? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051103084645.53229.qmail@web26713.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Has the Proactionary Principle just put it's head above the parapet in British Courts? It was announced this morning that legislation will be introduced to combat the growing Compensation Culture, and in particular the tendency for the number of school trips for children to dwindle as schools are increasingly fearful of being sued if anything should go wrong. New advice to courts will be: "a court which is considering a negligence claim should also take into account any benefit of the activity, and organisers who have taken reasonable precautions will not be held liable." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4401820.stm So finally are potential benefits as well as potential risks going to be balanced in the equation? Julian "Fahrkarte bis zur Endstation!" ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 3 09:21:54 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 01:21:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Geowanking In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511022112sdb22be3i@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051103092154.95865.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > Australians will be scratching out their eyes in > horror at this > subject line, but apparently this is the name of a > list for elite GPS > and mapping enthusiasts. I just had to mention it, > maybe some of my > fellow Aussies can describe what it suggests to > them? Our cultures > (Aussies and generic US internet) are so close, but > there is the odd > catastrophic disconnect. Perhaps it is an obscure reference to a oft repeated, and possibly urban-mythological, story of a school teacher who had a student turn in a history report about how Magellan circumcised the Earth with a 100 ft clipper. ;) The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From gregburch at gregburch.net Thu Nov 3 13:03:28 2005 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 07:03:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: [I wish I knew how to insert comments INTO an html mail message, but I don't...] Below, you say, "Item 2 - If by left/right is meant community/individual focus then it will never be transcended." Here's the problem with "left/right" from my perspective (and that of many other people, although they may not be able to identify why that particular dichotomy irks them so): The origin of left/right was, as we all know, the accident of how proponents of the French Revolution and those of the ancien regime sorted their seating out in the Estates General. As a political reality of that particular point in time and space, the description made sense and carried useful political meaning. Unfortunately, from that day forward there has been a tension between two axes of meaning: 1)Conservatism vs. Progressivism and 2) Individualism vs. Collectivism. It is this tension that has caused me to utterly reject the left/right dichotomy for over twenty years, which leads to an almost constant misunderstanding of my own political views by people in the political mainstream who accept the left/right concept as something with continuing meaning. For instance, the mainstream "right" in America tends to be a mish-mash of conservative and individualist elements that are deeply inconsistent on the level of principles and, likelwise, the "left" in America has become increasingly conservative in its collectivist approach to things like race relations. Thus it is common for me to have people on the "left" think of me as being on the "right" and visa versa. Natasha is, in my opinion, exactly right in strongly rejecting this one-dimensional approach to politics. GB -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:40 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics On 11/2/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote: Since I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an interview with a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures politics as 4 points: 1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party today advocates solutions for the world's most immediate issues. 2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line between conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is the best position to take when addressing what the world needs to focus on in the coming decades. 3. Futures Strategy. Designing strategic analysis of issues that society faces and producing alternative "futures" for society to review before voting. The Futures Strategy would provide the means for people - anywhere and at anytime - to learn about issues, possible options for dealing with and solving problems, and to voice their own opinions through a time-efficient and cost-effective P2P architecture. 4. Encouragement of critical thinking. In order to understand issues society needs to be skilled at critical thinking. Thoughts? Item 1 is a non starter. As long as different people have conflicting interests, or wish to solve a particular problem using different methods, there will be partisan politics. Item 2 - If by left/right is meant community/individual focus then it will never be transcended. Item 3 - This only works if there is a true meritocracy - not democracy. OTOH people can voice their opinions now, except nobody is obliged to listen. Item 4 - A lot more than critical thinking is required. Educational standards in general must rise significantly. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 3 13:58:44 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 13:58:44 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <43698338.4040701@goldenfuture.net> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051102133953.02f27860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <43698338.4040701@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: On 11/3/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > > 2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing a hard line > > between conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking ahead is > > the best position to take when addressing what the world needs to > > focus on in the coming decades. > > > I tend to agree. (Although I should point out that I think Dirk in his > response was speaking to the idea that traditionally the political Left > advocates the interests of the State over the Individual, and > traditionally the Right advocates the reverse, in his rather terse reply > to you, which you didn't seem to understand.) I think that politics in > the future will transcend these pre-French Revolution ideas and move to > something else. What that will be, I cannot say, and I daresay none of I strongly disagree. If anything posthumanity will move in two diametrically opposite directions which correspond to the extremes of left and right - namely hive mind versus self sufficient individual. Dirk From gregburch at gregburch.net Thu Nov 3 14:18:42 2005 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 08:18:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Proactionary in court? In-Reply-To: <20051103084645.53229.qmail@web26713.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > From: bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk > > Has the Proactionary Principle just put it's head > above the parapet in British Courts? > > It was announced this morning that legislation will be > introduced to combat the growing Compensation Culture, > and in particular the tendency for the number of > school trips for children to dwindle as schools are > increasingly fearful of being sued if anything should > go wrong. New advice to courts will be: > > "a court which is considering a negligence claim > should also take into account any benefit of the > activity, and organisers who have taken reasonable > precautions will not be held liable." > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4401820.stm > > So finally are potential benefits as well as potential > risks going to be balanced in the equation? > > Julian Risk-benefit balancing has been an explicit part of U.S. tort liability law for a long time, in the area of what we call "products liability." Here's a discussion that includes elements of risk-benefit balancing in the most recent Restatement of that law: http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Aug/1/129315.html Look at the quotations from the official commentary to Chapter 1. As the Restatements often do, there is a tendency here to annunciate from "on high" without full recognition of some of the difficulties of applying the principles articulated to specific cases. In practice, courts have been struggling with the "utlitiy" aspect of this law for its entire four decade history. GB From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 3 14:57:14 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 06:57:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511031457.jA3EvDe06244@tick.javien.com> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics > > ... When will it end? How can we get off our duffs and go > be beyond our self-satisfied dreamy assurances in order to end it? > > - samantha It will end as soon as we get enough politicians to recognize that market forces overpower legal pressures. We might be making progress in that direction, but it is hard to tell. I expect there will be growing market pressure to get most of the dopers out of prison: we need their labor and taxes, as well as the cell they occupy. spike From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 3 15:24:05 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 15:24:05 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <200511031457.jA3EvDe06244@tick.javien.com> References: <200511031457.jA3EvDe06244@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/3/05, spike wrote: > > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics > > > > ... When will it end? How can we get off our duffs and go > > be beyond our self-satisfied dreamy assurances in order to end it? > > > > - samantha > > > It will end as soon as we get enough politicians > to recognize that market forces overpower legal > pressures. > > We might be making progress in that direction, > but it is hard to tell. I expect there will be > growing market pressure to get most of the dopers > out of prison: we need their labor and taxes, as > well as the cell they occupy. There are two types of market forces here. The diffuse kind, to which you refer. And the kind that is concentrated in the businesses making money out of the existing system. The latter exerts far more power on the legislative process even though it is far less quantitatively than the former. It's not just straight economics, but the concentration of economic power within narrow special interests that matters. Dirk From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 3 16:31:37 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 10:31:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Geosnipping In-Reply-To: <20051103092154.95865.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> References: <710b78fc0511022112sdb22be3i@mail.gmail.com> <20051103092154.95865.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051103103017.01dcc718@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:21 AM 11/3/2005 -0800, Avantguardian wrote: >Magellan circumcised the Earth with a 100 ft >clipper. ;) I heard it was a 40-ft cutter. Damien Broderick From anissimov at singinst.org Thu Nov 3 17:01:52 2005 From: anissimov at singinst.org (Michael Anissimov) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 09:01:52 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup Message-ID: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> Fellow transhumanists, I found an interesting social software tool that allows you to share your picture and location with others. It's called Frappr... quite interesting. I created this one for transhumanists: http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists Just another tendril connecting the virtual with the physical - feel free to add yourself! (You might want to state your Skype name or MSN/AIM name as well.) Consider creating one for your favorite transhumanist spinoff sect. Be careful with your shoutout - once you say something, only an admin can delete it. Have fun! -- Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Nov 3 17:16:38 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 11:16:38 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051101133704.072e3d40@unreasonable.com> References: <200510300620.j9U6K5e04458@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051031092934.02b00860@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <8d71341e0510311059n5d83ad93u94cf1775724e926b@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051031204311.071e1cc0@unreasonable.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051101093204.04e4e688@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051101133704.072e3d40@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051103111105.04cd7e68@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 02:26 PM 11/1/2005, David wrote: >Max wrote: > >>How does that prove your claim? You think that because several businesses >>have or are using "EXI' that we have no rights to ExI? That's mistaken. >>No one else that I checked is using it in a context that is likely to >>cause confusion with our organization. > >You don't have a registered federal trademark for ExI, while in fact >several other organizations do, including EXi Corp. > >For that matter, I see no registered federal trademarks owned by either >Extropy Institute or Max More. An incorporation means that the name of a business is registered with the Secretary of State and legally "incorporated" with Articles of Incorporation. When anyone files for a new business, he or she must check with the Secretary of State to make sure that the name is not already incorporated. The Secretary of State's office very carefully checks all business names to make sure no one is using the name of another business to conduct the same or a similar business. The law states that a person must determine the Availability of a Company Name. Search Name Availability to ensure that your newly formed corporation or business name is not already used by another business entity. The Name Availability search will help you avoid corporation name conflicts and ensure that your company name is distinct. Branding is another form of producing and marketing a business name and product or service. Once this has occurred, it is bad business practice to use a name that has already been branded. In most cases, it is not done out of common sense and professional courtesy. In other cases, some people may do this to produce a negative outcome and if it damages the original business in a way that affects its products, services and well being in the community, it can become a legal action and these are most often settled out of court wherein the infringing party coughs up a lot of money and backs off having lost good standing in the public eye and produced a lot of bad feelings and even enemies, which is not a smart business practice. Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emerson at singinst.org Thu Nov 3 18:58:40 2005 From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 10:58:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Social software + Google maps mashup In-Reply-To: <20051103171304.69308.qmail@web54509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511031858.jA3Iwee06275@tick.javien.com> I hope everyone will take advantage of this by adding their location. It's a simple way to track where transhumanists are located. http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists Thanks for the heads-up, Michael. ~~ Tyler Emerson | Executive Director | The Singularity Institute Box 50182 | Palo Alto, CA 94303 | T-F: 866.667.2524 emerson at singinst.org | http://www.singinst.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sl4 at sl4.org [mailto:owner-sl4 at sl4.org] On Behalf Of Phil Goetz > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 9:13 AM > To: sl4 at sl4.org > Subject: [inbox] Re: Social software + Google maps mashup > > > > --- Michael Anissimov wrote: > > > Fellow transhumanists, > > > > I found an interesting social software tool that allows you to share > > your picture and location with others. It's called Frappr... quite > > interesting. I created this one for transhumanists: > > > > http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists > > God damn it. I'd been planning to do this for almost 10 years, > but Mapquest and Mapblast's licensing terms were too restrictive. > > - Phil > > > > __________________________________ > Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. > http://farechase.yahoo.com From reason at longevitymeme.org Thu Nov 3 21:27:55 2005 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason .) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 15:27:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] $1 Million Donation Made To the Mprize For Anti-Aging Research Message-ID: <200511031527.AA402587922@longevitymeme.org> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000655.php Yes, you read that right: Mprize, $1 million donation, and I have it from Dave Gobel that the cashier's check just cleared today. Wow. This was somewhat out of the blue, and certainly far ahead of our expectations for progress in the rest of 2005! Let me be one of the first to thank the anonymous donor for his or her generosity and for greatly raising the level of vindication experienced by the Mprize volunteers and other donors. This is a big step forward for efforts to vitalize serious scientific progress towards a cure for aging. There is a long way to go yet - and more seven figure donations, I hope - but thank you, anonymous donor, for pushing the best present day effort into the major leagues. From the press release draft (the final version should be out on the wires sometime following this post, and the Mprize website updated soon): The anonymous $1 million donor cited a growing understanding of the real possibility of curing aging in our lifetimes as his reason for making such a tremendous investment. He first learned about de Grey's work from the popular press, even though most journalists take the easy path of characterizing de Grey ? a respected, widely published figure in the scientific community ? as an odd eccentric. The donor followed the Fight Aging! blog ( http://www.fightaging.org ) and the online newsletter of The Longevity Meme ( http://www.longevitymeme.org ), both advocates of de Grey's work and the Mprize in particular. In the Mprize, this donor saw a popular movement in the making, a movement of people who were not to be discouraged by the conservatism and lack of action in ivory tower gerontology. Every dollar in the prize fund represents a voice, calling for the scientific community to take the final steps towards real, working anti-aging medicine. So, as many others have done, this anonymous donor realized that he could help the Mprize and thus help the fight against degenerative aging and age-related disease ? medical conditions that claim more than 100,000 lives each and every day. So he sent a cashier's check to the address listed on the Mprize website ? a check for $1 million. I should extend thanks to our newest anonymous donor for increasing my personal levels of vindication as well. And once again, many thanks to everyone who has supported the Mprize over the past few years, building it to the level at which it can attract this sort of dedication from wealthy philanthropists. As Mprize executive director Kevin Perrott said earlier, "Nothing is going to bother me today." From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 4 00:20:44 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 10:50:44 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup In-Reply-To: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> References: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511031620i33cc2027u@mail.gmail.com> Very cool. I notice a lot of colourful characters from round these here parts have turned up there. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 5187 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 04/11/05, Michael Anissimov wrote: > Fellow transhumanists, > > I found an interesting social software tool that allows you to share > your picture and location with others. It's called Frappr... quite > interesting. I created this one for transhumanists: > > http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists > > Just another tendril connecting the virtual with the physical - feel > free to add yourself! (You might want to state your Skype name or > MSN/AIM name as well.) Consider creating one for your favorite > transhumanist spinoff sect. Be careful with your shoutout - once you > say something, only an admin can delete it. Have fun! > > -- > Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ > Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 4 01:18:06 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 12:18:06 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Betfair looks to get Australian licence Message-ID: <06d901c5e0dd$9c33c580$8998e03c@homepc> Those interested in Robin's ideas futures might be interested in this. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17134214%255E2702,00.html Brett Paatsch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diegocaleiro at terra.com.br Fri Nov 4 00:59:39 2005 From: diegocaleiro at terra.com.br (Diego Caleiro) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:59:39 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Transhumanist napster manifests. In-Reply-To: <200511031527.AA402587922@longevitymeme.org> References: <200511031527.AA402587922@longevitymeme.org> Message-ID: <200511032259.39797.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> I have defended twice here that the best way to get funds to transhumanist goals is taking the transhuman memes to millionaires. I still beleive this idea, and this 1 Million dollars donation makes me feel 1 million dollars nearer to be right about it. Someone called for the transhumanist napster, in the sense of something that really pushes transhumanism foward. I beleive that nothing can do that better than call to arms for billionaires and millionaires. Once there is money on it, we will be able to atract public attention. And voila, more money, more lifes saved. Diego Caleiro From matus at matus1976.com Fri Nov 4 05:04:20 2005 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 00:04:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics > > dreams out of reach for generations. In the US we have 2.3 million > in prison I heard very recently. More than any country. More than > any country on a per capita basis ever in history. I have heard that > around 60% nationwide are in on drug charges, most for simple > possession. After decades of such hate-filled abuse it still > > - samantha > Ah another one of my favorite statistics. Really Samantha, does the US imprison a higher percentage of it's population than Vietnam? Burma? Cuba? Saudi Arabia? And where exactly do these statistics come from, their respective ministries of honorable and reliable information? Do we ever get to see official sources for these statistics? I think such a statement should at least be qualified as 'The US imprisons a higher percentage of it's population than any other westernized liberal democracy' or something to that effect, but to say it imprisons more than any country in the world is clearly disingenuous and egregious in the face of the millions of people who rot in the hell holes and gulags of the murderous dictatorships of the world. Additionally it should be noted that we also have a subculture that glorifies violence as a means to acquire value. England has a similar problem with it's 'yobs', and this, in addition to the ridiculous criminalization of drug use, contributes to our prison populations. Matus From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 4 12:23:39 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 04:23:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> References: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> Message-ID: On Nov 3, 2005, at 9:04 PM, Matus wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins >> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics >> >> dreams out of reach for generations. In the US we have 2.3 million >> in prison I heard very recently. More than any country. More than >> any country on a per capita basis ever in history. I have heard that >> around 60% nationwide are in on drug charges, most for simple >> possession. After decades of such hate-filled abuse it still >> >> - samantha >> >> > > Ah another one of my favorite statistics. Really Samantha, does > the US > imprison a higher percentage of it's population than Vietnam? Burma? > Cuba? Saudi Arabia? And where exactly do these statistics come from, > their respective ministries of honorable and reliable information? > I did some digging in case this was the regurgitation of some mental lint that has been floating around the net. It turns out that the any other country in history part is almost certainly bogus. However, as far as is documented, we have more people in prison than any other country today and we have more people per capita in prison. From the Straight Dope: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/040206.html > Do we ever get to see official sources for these statistics? > > I think such a statement should at least be qualified as 'The US > imprisons a higher percentage of it's population than any other > westernized liberal democracy' or something to that effect, but to say > it imprisons more than any country in the world is clearly > disingenuous > and egregious in the face of the millions of people who rot in the > hell > holes and gulags of the murderous dictatorships of the world. > Which precisely do you have in mind? > Additionally it should be noted that we also have a subculture that > glorifies violence as a means to acquire value. England has a similar > problem with it's 'yobs', and this, in addition to the ridiculous > criminalization of drug use, contributes to our prison populations. > Not really. The rates of violence are down in much of the country. Only a small part of the prison population is in for violent crime. Homicide, Aggravated Assault, Kidnapping combined came to 3.2% in 2005 according to the Bureau of Prisons. Throw in Burglary, Larceny and Property Offenses and you get up to 7.2%. So your hypothesis is inconsistent with the data. - samantha From hemm at openlink.com.br Fri Nov 4 13:03:09 2005 From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:03:09 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Social software + Google maps mashup References: <200511031858.jA3Iwee06275@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <009301c5e140$1ad88080$fe00a8c0@HEMM> And then the government will know where we all live... :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tyler Emerson" To: Cc: ; Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 4:58 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Social software + Google maps mashup > I hope everyone will take advantage of this by adding their location. It's a > simple way to track where transhumanists are located. > > http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists > > Thanks for the heads-up, Michael. From bret at bonfireproductions.com Fri Nov 4 14:26:25 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 09:26:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup In-Reply-To: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> References: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> Message-ID: Thanks for doing this! Perhaps it will spark some activity on Exi-East! Does anyone here Flickr? It could be a nice meme-generator to have someone Flickr the large >H events. Who are we if we're not leveraging these things? ]3 On Nov 3, 2005, at 12:01 PM, Michael Anissimov wrote: > Fellow transhumanists, > > I found an interesting social software tool that allows you to > share your picture and location with others. It's called Frappr... > quite interesting. I created this one for transhumanists: > > http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists > > Just another tendril connecting the virtual with the physical - > feel free to add yourself! (You might want to state your Skype > name or MSN/AIM name as well.) Consider creating one for your > favorite transhumanist spinoff sect. Be careful with your shoutout > - once you say something, only an admin can delete it. Have fun! > > -- > Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ > Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 4 12:38:02 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 04:38:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> References: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> Message-ID: <3ADB3B5E-E76F-4139-A3D7-82CF431D2674@mac.com> Here are a few interesting tidbits about the War against Pot in particular that I picked up at: http://www.mpp.org/prohfact.html Marijuana Prohibition Facts (2005) Very few Americans had even heard about marijuana when it was first federally prohibited in 1937. Today, between 95 and 100 million Americans admit to having tried it. 1,2 According to government-funded researchers, high school seniors consistently report that marijuana is easily available, despite decades of a nationwide drug war. With little variation, every year about 85% consider marijuana ?fairly easy? or ?very easy? to obtain. 3 Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that more U.S. high school students currently smoke marijuana, which is completely unregulated, than smoke cigarettes, which are sold by regulated businesses. 4 There have been over seven million marijuana arrests in the United States since 1993, including 755,186 arrests in 2003?an all-time record. One person is arrested for marijuana every 42 seconds. About 88% of all marijuana arrests are for possession?not manufacture or distribution. 5 Every comprehensive, objective government commission that has examined the marijuana phenomenon throughout the past 100 years has recommended that adults should not be criminalized for using marijuana. 6 Cultivation of even one marijuana plant is a federal felony. Lengthy mandatory minimum sentences apply to myriad offenses. For example, a person must serve a five-year mandatory minimum sentence if federally convicted of cultivating 100 marijuana plants?including seedlings or bug-infested, sickly plants. This is longer than the average sentences for auto theft and manslaughter! 7 A one-year minimum prison sentence is mandated for ?distributing? or ?manufacturing? controlled substances within 1,000 feet of any school, university, or playground. Most areas in a city fall within these ?drug-free zones.? An adult who lives three blocks from a university is subject to a one-year mandatory minimum sentence for selling an ounce of marijuana to another adult?or even growing one marijuana plant in his or her basement. 8 Approximately 77,000 marijuana offenders are in prison or jail right now. 9 A recent study of prisons in four Midwestern states found that approximately one in ten male inmates reported that that they had been raped while in prison. 10 Rates of rape and sexual assault against women prisoners, who are most likely to be abused by male staff members, have been reported to be as high as 27 percent in some institutions. 11 Civil forfeiture laws allow police to seize the money and property of suspected marijuana offenders?charges need not even be filed. The claim is against the property, not the defendant. The owner must then prove that the property is ?innocent.? Enforcement abuses stemming from forfeiture laws abound. 12 MPP estimates that the war on marijuana consumers costs taxpayers nearly $12 billion annually. 13 Many patients and their doctors find marijuana a useful medicine as part of the treatment for AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, and other ailments. Yet the federal government allows only seven patients in the United States to use marijuana as a medicine, through a program now closed to new applicants. Federal laws treat all other patients currently using medical marijuana as criminals. Doctors are presently allowed to prescribe cocaine and morphine?but not marijuana. 14,15 Organizations that have endorsed medical access to marijuana include: the AIDS Action Council, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Public Health Association, American Academy of HIV Medicine, American Nurses Association, Lymphoma Foundation of America, National Association of People With AIDS, the New England Journal of Medicine, the state medical associations of New York, California, Florida and Rhode Island, and many others. A few of the many editorial boards that have endorsed medical access to marijuana include: Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Miami Herald, New York Times, Orange County Register, USA Today, Baltimore?s Sun, and The Los Angeles Times. Since 1996, a majority of voters in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington state have voted in favor of ballot initiatives to remove criminal penalties for seriously ill people who grow or possess medical marijuana. Seventy-two percent of Americans believe that marijuana users should not be jailed. Eighty percent support legal access to medical marijuana for seriously ill adults. 2 ?Decriminalization? involves the removal of criminal penalties for possession of marijuana for personal use. Small fines may be issued (somewhat similarly to traffic tickets), but there is typically no arrest, incarceration, or criminal record. Marijuana is presently decriminalized in 11 states?California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon. In these states, cultivation and distribution remain criminal offenses. Decriminalization saves a tremendous amount in enforcement costs. California saves $100 million per year. 16 A 2001 National Research Council study sponsored by the U.S. government found ?little apparent relationship between the severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use, and ... perceived legal risk explains very little in the variance of individual drug use.? The primary evidence cited came from comparisons between states that have and have not decriminalized marijuana. 17 In the Netherlands, where adult possession and purchase of small amounts of marijuana are allowed under a regulated system, the rate of marijuana use by teenagers is far lower than in the U.S. 3,18 Under a regulated system, licensed merchants have an incentive to check ID and avoid selling to minors. Such a system also separates marijuana from the trade in hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin. ?Zero tolerance? policies against ?drugged driving? can result in ?DUI? convictions of drivers who are not intoxicated at all. Trace amounts of THC metabolites?detected by commonly used tests?can linger in blood and urine for weeks after any psychoactive effects have worn off. This is equivalent to convicting someone of ?drunk driving? weeks after he or she drank one beer. 19 The arbitrary criminalization of tens of millions of Americans who consume marijuana results in a large-scale lack of respect for the law and the entire criminal justice system. Marijuana prohibition subjects users to added health hazards: ? Adulterants, contaminants, and impurities?Marijuana purchased through criminal markets is not subject to the same quality control standards as are legal consumer goods. Illicit marijuana may be adulterated with much more damaging substances; contaminated with pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers; and/or infected with molds, fungi, or bacteria. ? Inhalation of hot smoke?One well-established hazard of marijuana consumption is the fact that smoke from burning plant material is bad for the respiratory system. Laws that prohibit the sale or possession of paraphernalia make it difficult to obtain and use devices such as vaporizers, which can reduce these risks. 20 Because vigorous enforcement of the marijuana laws forces the toughest, most dangerous criminals to take over marijuana trafficking, prohibition links marijuana sales to violence, predatory crime, and terrorism. Prohibition invites corruption within the criminal justice system by giving officials easy, tempting opportunities to accept bribes, steal and sell marijuana, and plant evidence on innocent people. Because marijuana is typically used in private, trampling the Bill of Rights is a routine part of marijuana law enforcement?e.g., use of drug dogs, urine tests, phone taps, government informants, curbside garbage searches, military helicopters, and infrared heat detectors. NOTES 1. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2003, Table G.1. 2. Time/CNN poll of adults, Time, Nov. 4, 2002. Forty-seven percent said they had tried marijuana at least once. 3. Johnston, Lloyd D., O?Malley, Patrick M., Bachman, Jerald G., and Schulenberg, John. E., Monitoring the Future, National Results on Adolescent Drug Abuse: Overview of Key Findings, 2003, National Institute on Drug Abuse, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance -- United States, 2003, May 21, 2004, MMWR 2004:3(No. SS-2), tables 20 and 28. 5. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports, Crime in the United States, annually. 6. For example, Report of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission, 1894; The Panama Canal Zone Military Investigations, 1925; The Marihuana Problem in the City of New York (LaGuardia Committee Report), 1944; Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding (Nixon-Shafer Report), 1972; An Analysis of Marijuana Policy (National Academy of Sciences), 1982; Cannabis, Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy (Report of the Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs), 2002, and others. 7. 21USC841(b)(1)(B); 1996 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Guidelines, U.S. Sentencing Commission, 1997; p. 24. 8. 21USC860(a); report from Congressional Research Service, June 22, 1995. 9. Estimated by MPP, based on Prisoners in 2001, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice; Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2001, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice; Profile of Jail Inmates, 1996, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice; Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 10. Struckman-Johnson, Cindy, and Struckman-Johnson, David, Sexual Coercion Rates in Seven Midwestern Prisons for Men, The Prison Journal, December 2000, pp. 379-90. 11. Struckman-Johnson, Cindy, and Struckman-Johnson, David, ?Summary of Sexual Coercion Data,? for the conference ?Not Part of the Penalty: Ending Prisoner Rape,? Oct. 19, 2001. 12. U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde (R?IL), Forfeiting Our Property Rights: Is Your Property Safe From Seizure? Cato Institute, 1995. 13. In 2002, the federal government spent $18.8 billion on the ?drug war.? Approximately 53% ($9.964 billion) was spent on enforcement, court, and prison expenses, with the rest used for treatment and education (National Drug Control Strategy, Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2002). In 1991?the most recent year for which data are available?state and local governments spent a total of nearly $16 billion, of which about 80% was used for enforcement, court, and prison costs (National Drug Control Strategy, Office of National Drug Control Policy, 1994). State and local spending is estimated to have increased to $20 billion annually in 2002 (?Drug War Retreat? The Pentagon?s Double-Edged Plan to Scale Back,? Daytona Beach News- Journal, Nov. 9, 2002). Hence, the total annual criminal justice system expenditure for federal, state, and local governments is $25.964 billion ($9.964 billion + $16 billion [$20 billion x 80%]). While this total annual expenditure is not broken down by specific drugs, marijuana crimes account for 45% of all drug arrests (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States, 2003). Assuming that expense and arrest percentages roughly match, the war on marijuana consumers costs taxpayers $11.68 billion annually. 14. Grinspoon, Lester, M.D., and Bakalar B., J.D., ?Marijuana as Medicine: A Plea for Reconsideration,? Journal of the American Medical Association, June 21, 1995. 15. Marijuana Policy Project, Medical Marijuana Briefing Paper, 2004. 16. Aldrich, Michael, Ph.D., and Mikuriya, Tod, M.D., ?Savings in California Marijuana Law Enforcement Costs Attributable to the Moscone Act of 1976?A Summary,? Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, Vol. 20 (1), Jan.?March 1988; pp. 75-81. 17. National Research Council, Informing America?s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don?t Know Keeps Hurting Us, National Academy Press, 2001; pp. 192-93. 18. Abraham, Manja D., Kaal, Hendrien L., and Cohen, Peter D.A., Licit and illicit drug use in the Netherlands 2001. Amsterdam: CEDRO/ Mets en Schilt, 2002. 19. Swann, P., ?The Real Risk of Being Killed When Driving Whilst Impaired by Cannabis,? Australian Studies of Cannabis and Accident Risk, 2000. 20. Mirken, Bruce, ?Vaporizers for Medical Marijuana,? AIDS Treatment News, Issue #327, September 17, 1999. Revised 12/2004 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anissimov at singinst.org Fri Nov 4 15:38:29 2005 From: anissimov at singinst.org (Michael Anissimov) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 07:38:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience Institute DVDs available Message-ID: <436B8075.9090201@singinst.org> Talks given at the recent inaugural symposium for the Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience Institute (a formerly independent non-profit funded by Jeff Hawkins, now part of UC Berkeley) are now available as a DVD. To order, send $5 to: *DVD - Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience* Attn: Guadalupe P. Brandon University of California 132 Barker Hall #3190 Berkeley, CA 94720-3190 USA Make the check out to "UC Regents". Talks included are: *Horace Barlow, Cambridge University* "The Roles of Theory, Commonsense, and Guesswork in Neuroscience" *Dan Kersten, University of Minnesota* "Human Object Perception: Theory, Psychophysics & Imaging" *Sue Becker, McMaster University* "The role of the hippocampus in memory, contextual gating, stress and depression" *Florentin Worgotter, University of Goettingen* "Learning in Neurons and Robots" *Discussion* The Role and Future Prospects for Math/Computational Theories in Neuroscience *David Heeger, New York University* "What fMRI Can Tell Us about How Visual Cortex Works" *Kevan Martin, ETH/UNI Zurich* "Canonical Circuits for Neocortex" *Terry Sejnowski, Salk Institute* "Dendritic Darwinism" *Jeff Hawkins, Numenta* "Prospects and Problems of Cortical Theory" This is the cutting edge of neuroscience research. Seems quite fascinating. I can't wait to check it out! -- Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 4 15:40:41 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 15:40:41 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Social software + Google maps mashup In-Reply-To: <009301c5e140$1ad88080$fe00a8c0@HEMM> References: <200511031858.jA3Iwee06275@tick.javien.com> <009301c5e140$1ad88080$fe00a8c0@HEMM> Message-ID: On 11/4/05, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > And then the government will know where we all live... :-) I think the tax man already knows where I live... Apart from that, my home address, pic and phone number have been available on the Net for years. Dirk From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Fri Nov 4 19:13:44 2005 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:13:44 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <00f101c5e0fd$3ab0f330$6b01a8c0@hplaptop> Message-ID: On 11/3/05 9:04 PM, "Matus" wrote: > > Ah another one of my favorite statistics. Really Samantha, does the US > imprison a higher percentage of it's population than Vietnam? Burma? > Cuba? Saudi Arabia? And where exactly do these statistics come from, > their respective ministries of honorable and reliable information? The discrepancy is in the definition of "prison". There are still many authoritarian countries, including ones listed above, where many/most people not allowed to live their province or village on pain of death. Or where getting permission to leave requires that the government holds a family member hostage to guarantee that you return. There are no "prisons" or "cells" or "guards" per se, but the country is effectively a prison. For most modern western countries, there is a clear delineation between the penal system and the rest of society and some nominal presumption of innocence, and the statistics are based on these assumptions. J. Andrew Rogers From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 02:14:19 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:14:19 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Blacklight pops up again Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Still sounds like crap: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1627424,00.html < Rick Maas, a chemist at the University of North Carolina at Asheville (UNC) who specialises in sustainable energy sources, was allowed unfettered access to Blacklight's laboratories this year. "We went in with a healthy amount of scepticism. While it would certainly be nice if this were true, in my position as head of a research institution, I really wouldn't want to make a mistake. The last thing I want is to be remembered as the person who derailed a lot of sustainable energy investment into something that wasn't real." But Prof Maas and Randy Booker, a UNC physicist, left under no doubt about Dr Mill's claims. "All of us who are not quantum physicists are looking at Dr Mills's data and we find it very compelling," said Prof Maas. "Dr Booker and I have both put our professional reputations on the line as far as that goes." > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 02:21:08 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 02:21:08 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Blacklight pops up again In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/5/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Still sounds like crap: > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1627424,00.html > > < Rick Maas, a chemist at the University of North Carolina at Asheville > (UNC) who specialises in sustainable energy sources, was allowed > unfettered > access to Blacklight's laboratories this year. "We went in with a healthy > amount of scepticism. While it would certainly be nice if this were true, > in my position as head of a research institution, I really wouldn't want > to > make a mistake. The last thing I want is to be remembered as the person > who > derailed a lot of sustainable energy investment into something that wasn't > real." > > But Prof Maas and Randy Booker, a UNC physicist, left under no doubt about > Dr Mill's claims. "All of us who are not quantum physicists are looking at > Dr Mills's data and we find it very compelling," said Prof Maas. "Dr > Booker > and I have both put our professional reputations on the line as far as > that > goes." > > And if it works it will still sound like crap. One of the interesting things is that the guy has published papers that show that classical physics can reproduce the findings of QM, plus a bit more. Anyway, we will see eventually one way or another. Experiment is king. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 02:27:30 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 18:27:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511050227.jA52RYe01417@tick.javien.com> > On 11/3/05 9:04 PM, "Matus" wrote: > > > > ... does the US imprison a higher percentage of it's population than Vietnam? Burma? Cuba? Saudi Arabia? ... ... In most of human history on most of this planet, they probably would just shoot or hang the criminals. With the modern legal system, there has never been a better time than now or a better place than the west to be a criminal. spike From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 5 03:10:34 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:10:34 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics References: <200511041900.jA4J0Be27860@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <006401c5e1b6$823695c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: "Matus" Wrote > -----Original Message-----On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > > In the US we have 2.3 million > in prison I heard very recently. More than any country. More than > any country on a per capita basis ever in history. I have heard that > around 60% nationwide are in on drug charges, most for simple > possession. After decades of such hate-filled abuse it still > > - samantha > Ah another one of my favorite statistics. Really Samantha, does the US imprison a higher percentage of it's population than Vietnam? Burma? Cuba? Saudi Arabia? And where exactly do these statistics come from, their respective ministries of honorable and reliable information? Do we ever get to see official sources for these statistics? The UN website has some independent reports: http://www.unicri.it/wwk/related/pni/docs/2001/walmsley.pdf You can also find this short statement at the UN website: World Prison Population - Overview ...In order to fully understand the magnitude of the problem, it is important first of all to have an appreciation of the number of prisoners incarcerated world-wide. The second edition (2000) of the World Prison Population List shows that over 8 ? million people are held in penal institutions throughout the world, either as pre-trial detainees (remand prisoners) or having been convicted and sentenced. Half of these are in the United States, Russia and China, and the first two countries also exhibit the highest prison population rates... Googling for 'UN statistics on imprisonment by country' is quite fruitful. Jack Parkinson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay.dugger at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 04:40:19 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 22:40:19 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup In-Reply-To: References: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> Message-ID: <5366105b0511042040l65539632x43a5d68c541c7745@mail.gmail.com> On 11/4/05, Bret Kulakovich wrote: [snip] > > Does anyone here Flickr? It could be a nice meme-generator to have > someone Flickr the large >H events. Who are we if we're not > leveraging these things? > Brad K. DeLong, Jay Dugger, and the WTA (as transhumanism) all have accounts on Flickr. -- Jay Dugger http://www.redcross.org Please donate if you can. From amara at amara.com Sat Nov 5 05:36:23 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 06:36:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] US Prison Population (was Futures politics) Message-ID: >Do we ever get to see official sources for these statistics? The Economist has a long article on this topic (I seem to remember more than one published in this magazine on this topic, but I cannot find it, so maybe I was thinking of another source) "Justice in America : Too many convicts" Aug 8th 2002 http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1270755 And an article from Business Week about the costs http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2005/nf20050228_1996_db013.htm Amara -- *********************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ *********************************************************************** "Never squat with your spurs on." -- Texan Proverb From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 05:41:04 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 23:41:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104234007.01d28b58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Spot the difference: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9912186/ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/04/content_3730276.htm From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 5 07:18:30 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 08:18:30 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Weinberg on multiverse References: Message-ID: <000a01c5e1d9$1feb8a10$b6c71b97@administxl09yj> Steven Weinberg about the 'Multiverse' in a long paper here: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0511037 "It must be acknowledged that there is a big di erence in the degree of confidence we can have in neo-Darwinism and in the multiverse. It is settled, as well as anything in science is ever settled, that the adaptations of living things on earth have come into being through natural selection acting on random undirected inheritable variations. About the multiverse, it is appropriate to keep an open mind, and opinions among scientists differ widely. In the Austin airport on the way to this meeting I noticed for sale the October issue of a magazine called 'Astronomy', having on the cover the headline "Why You Live in Multiple Universes." Inside I found a report of a discussion at a conference at Stanford, at which Martin Rees said that he was sufficiently confident about the multiverse to bet his dog's life on it, while Andrei Linde said he would bet his own life. As for me, I have just enough confidence about the multiverse to bet the lives of both Andrei Linde and Martin Rees's dog." From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 11:34:45 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:34:45 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Weinberg on multiverse In-Reply-To: <000a01c5e1d9$1feb8a10$b6c71b97@administxl09yj> References: <000a01c5e1d9$1feb8a10$b6c71b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: On 11/5/05, scerir wrote: > > Steven Weinberg about the 'Multiverse' > in a long paper here: > http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0511037 > "It must be acknowledged that there is a big di > erence in the degree of confidence we can have > in neo-Darwinism and in the multiverse. It is > settled, as well as anything in science is ever settled, > that the adaptations of living things on earth > have come into being through natural selection > acting on random undirected inheritable variations. > About the multiverse, it is appropriate to keep > an open mind, and opinions among scientists differ > widely. In the Austin airport on the way to this meeting > I noticed for sale the October issue of a magazine called > 'Astronomy', having on the cover the headline "Why You Live > in Multiple Universes." Inside I found a report of > a discussion at a conference at Stanford, at which Martin > Rees said that he was sufficiently confident about > the multiverse to bet his dog's life on it, > while Andrei Linde said he would bet his own life. > As for me, I have just enough confidence about the multiverse > to bet the lives of both Andrei Linde and Martin Rees's dog." > Deutsch is probably the most fervent supporter of the MWI when it comes to multiverses. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 11:38:13 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:38:13 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104234007.01d28b58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104234007.01d28b58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/5/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Spot the difference: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9912186/ > > http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/04/content_3730276.htm > > So, are you pointing up any inaccuracies or is it that the Chinese have chosen to report a diferent aspect of the emails sent? Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Sat Nov 5 12:03:01 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:03:01 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Question for Technorati experts Message-ID: Hi extropes, This is a try-in-the-dark question for those of you who are Technorati experts. I would like to know how to put a different label on search results with a keyword search. The blogsphere has some cool stuff, but it is mixed with uninteresting stuff that I want to filter the viewer from in my results. My specific need is to grab the URLS of the wavelets blogs and filter out porn/sex/gay/teen/resume for my wavelet page (*). I.e.
Technorati search
Does anyone know? So far the only answer I can think is to write a cgi script to process the form but I was hoping this kind of request would be so common that an easy solution is already available. I asked the technorati people in their feedback portion of the web site, but I think my question was probably too dumb for them, because they didn't answer. Thanks in advance... Amara (*) http://www.amara.com/current/wavelet.html -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "My life has a superb cast but I can't figure out the plot." --Ashleigh Brilliant From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Nov 5 15:28:02 2005 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 07:28:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> References: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105152802.GA5319@ofb.net> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:53:54AM -0800, spike wrote: > In response to a comment by Avantguardian that > went something like: I live in Taxifornia where Taxifornia, land of Proposition 13's property tax cap, and subsequent decay of public schools? > US 'socialism' is what we Europeans call rabid right wing government. > Dirk > pension problem. We yanks have a social security > fund that is supposed to go bust in 2038, but I "Supposed" depending on who you listen to. Krugman's analysis is much more sanguine that Bush's. -xx- Damien X-) From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Nov 5 15:35:32 2005 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 07:35:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051101125128.02f04ed8@gmu.edu> References: <20051101061513.69921.qmail@web60018.mail.yahoo.com> <43679ACA.1040406@posthuman.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20051101125128.02f04ed8@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <20051105153532.GB5319@ofb.net> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 12:53:13PM -0500, Robin Hanson wrote: > This is an excellent, and I think deep question. Well worth > pondering at length. Why indeed. Not only are there no courses to > teach you how to invest in or run a business, they also teach little > about how to be a savvy consumer. Not the same thing, but my public high school had an investment club run by the economics and psychology teacher. They may have even used real money; I don't remember any details. -xx- Damien X-) From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 16:44:21 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 08:44:21 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] prop 13 and public schools In-Reply-To: <20051105152802.GA5319@ofb.net> Message-ID: <200511051644.jA5GiJe07277@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Sullivan > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents ... > > Taxifornia, land of Proposition 13's property tax cap, and subsequent > decay of public schools? Ja, but prop 13 isn't what is causing the decay of the public schools. Taxifornia also has a high sales tax and a high income tax. If there are no controls over property taxes, one does not really own one's property. If there are no controls, one is merely renting one's own property from the state, which can arbitrarily raise the rates until the property owners must sell. With sales tax there are inherent controls: if they raise them too much, bricks and mortar businesses fail. With income taxes, there are inherent controls: if they raise them too much, people go bankrupt. But property taxes in most yank states lack such controls: if they raise them too much, people must sell their property. These taxes must be controlled or capped in some manner, especially in a state like taxifornia where the property values are absurd. Prop13 keeps governments under control. Taxifornia public schools are not really failing either. The students are learning. The facilities are in great shape. Extravagance is seen seen everywhere on the school grounds. Google on California Public Schools, that will give you a list, then google on a few randomly chosen public school websites. Do those facilities look decayed? I do not doubt that there exists propaganda claiming taxifornia public schools are decaying, but get on the web and check it out. We try to arrange the voting places to be at the public schools so that the voters are forced to come out and see it first-hand. In most cases, the schools are in better shape than the surrounding neighborhoods. I might add that the schools that are failing are not doing so because of lack of funds. They have plenty of money. The failing public schools are doing so because the criterion upon which is determined their success is the cumulative test scores of the students. Half of these tests cover English skills. There is a constant drain of students from publics schools whose native language is English, a constant drain of students in whose home is spoken only English. These are going to private schools in ever greater numbers. So more and more of the public school's limited time is taken up trying to teach basic English skills, which displaces ever more of the other half of the test, which is math. More money will not solve this problem. It pains me to write that comment, because of course every capitalist knows that more money can solve any problem. But I do not see how more money could solve this one. It might make it worse: the schools might hire more teachers that speak other-than-English, which would encourage the students to neglect learning the most valuable skill the taxifornia public schools are offering. Prop13 is our friend. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 17:17:53 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 09:17:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: <200511051644.jA5GiJe07277@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> The mainstream news media are having a field day over here with the French riots: they love to cover anything that bleeds or burns. Are there any French or Europeans that have enlightening commentary from an extropian point of view? Our yankee news media have very little credibility. Specific question: they keep saying these are the worst riots since the 1968 student uprisings. What were they rioting about in 1968? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 17:21:50 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 09:21:50 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104234007.01d28b58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511051721.jA5HLhe09965@tick.javien.com> The Chinese version doesn't point out that the banter went on *before* the levees collapsed? Is that what you had in mind? According the FEMA guidelines, the fed doesn't step in until three days after a disaster. Until then, the state is responsible. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Broderick > Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 9:41 PM > To: 'ExI chat list' > Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? > > Spot the difference: > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9912186/ > > http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/04/content_3730276.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From brian at posthuman.com Sat Nov 5 17:37:08 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:37:08 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? In-Reply-To: <200511051721.jA5HLhe09965@tick.javien.com> References: <200511051721.jA5HLhe09965@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <436CEDC4.4070507@posthuman.com> Study the picture y'all... -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From amara at amara.com Sat Nov 5 17:48:21 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 18:48:21 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hayabusa aborts lander on asteroid Itokawa Message-ID: http://planetary.org/news/2005/1104_Hayabusa_Japans_Asteroid_Mission.html The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's Hayabusa -- the world's first mission to attempt to land on an asteroid, collect samples, and return them to Earth - did not carry out the planned release of its lander Friday or the final part of its rehearsal for two brief landings scheduled for later this month. Around noon Japan Standard Time (JST) [7 p.m., November 3 Pacific Standard Time (PST)], mission controllers, who had detected "an anomalous signal" at the critical Go/NoGo timepoint, aborted both the release of the target marker and Minerva, the lander. There was no immediate word on when this part of the mission would be rescheduled. The $170-million-dollar asteroid chaser was to have descended to just about 30 meters (100 feet) above the asteroid to test a laser range finder and other instruments for the two landings scheduled for later this month and then move in closer to about 15 meters (50 feet) to release a target marker and Minerva - short for MIcro/Nano Experimental Robot Vehicle for Asteroid. Hayabusa, which means "falcon" in Japanese, began its descent around 4 a.m., JST on November 4 [11 a.m., November 3 PST] and by 8:45 a.m., it was within 1,700 meters (about 1 mile) of the surface. It was proceeding "smoothly" according to the live feed from JAXA's website, and two hours later, at 10:50 a.m. JST, it was just 1 kilometer (a little more than half a mile) from Itokawa. But that is apparently as close as it got before the anomalous signal brought the activities to a halt. Developed at the Institute of Space and Astronautical Science (ISAS), a space science research division arm of JAXA, Hayabusa launched from Japan's Kagoshima Space Center on May 9, 2003. It overcame a number of obstacles during its 1 billion kilometer (621 million mile) journey, including several life-threatening solar flares. That slowed its arrival a bit, but the spacecraft finally arrived at Itokawa in September of this year. -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 5 18:33:17 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:33:17 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> From: "spike" > Specific question: they keep saying these > are the worst riots since the 1968 student > uprisings. What were they rioting about > in 1968? In 1968 French students (and workers) were rioting against the old politics (Gaullism), the 'establishment', the old culture, and all that. But the same happened in Italy, in Germany, in California (remember Marcuse? and Angela Davis?), etc. Now *immigrants* (not just the old 'Pieds-Noirs', but also arabs and people coming from east) are rioting, around Paris, because they cannot get a job, because of money. The economy in France (but the same thing in Germany, and in Italy, etc.) is in bad condition. Our growth is < 1%. Your (US) growth is well > 3%. s. From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 18:41:04 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 10:41:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104234007.01d28b58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511051841.jA5If5e17565@tick.javien.com> >Damien > Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? > > Spot the difference: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9912186/ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/04/content_3730276.htm Waaaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaaaa. {8^D That is toooo funny. Thanks Damien, sharp eye! {8-] Lousy sneaky commies, you can never trust em. Its like this whole water fluoridation plot. You know that they get the public to buy into adding stannous fluoride, then later when no one is watching, they bring in a chemically similar but far more toxic ionic salt known as socius fluoride. This is already being done on both US coasts. Then when everyone is under the pernicious influence of the socius fluoride, a still more destructive substance is substituted, the super-toxic communus flouride. Marx, Engels, Mao, Lenin, were all known to have snorted communus flouride on a regular basis. The evidence is clear: those areas in the U.S. that have resisted communus fluoridation, known as the red states, seem to have greater problems with tooth decay. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 18:49:56 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 10:49:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <200511051849.jA5Inme18103@tick.javien.com> scerir: > in California (remember Marcuse? and Angela Davis?), etc. Well, actually no, but I am not the most historically savvy guy you ever met. Thanks scerir, this gives me a starting point for googling myself up to speed. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 10:33 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] riots in france > > From: "spike" > > > Specific question: they keep saying these > > are the worst riots since the 1968 student > > uprisings. What were they rioting about > > in 1968? > > In 1968 French students (and workers) were rioting > against the old politics (Gaullism), the 'establishment', > the old culture, and all that. But the same happened > in Italy, in Germany, in California (remember Marcuse? and > Angela Davis?), etc. > > Now *immigrants* (not just the old 'Pieds-Noirs', but also > arabs and people coming from east) are rioting, around Paris, > because they cannot get a job, because of money. The economy > in France (but the same thing in Germany, and in Italy, etc.) > is in bad condition. Our growth is < 1%. Your (US) growth is > well > 3%. > > s. From amara at amara.com Sat Nov 5 18:59:01 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:59:01 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france Message-ID: spike: >Are there any French or Europeans that >have enlightening commentary from an >extropian point of view? Our yankee >news media have very little credibility. Probably not extropian POV, but at least the International Herald Tribune will give a more realistic perspective than the news you are getting there: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/04/news/paris.php http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/04/business/france.php Amara From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 19:07:45 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:07:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <200511051849.jA5Inme18103@tick.javien.com> References: <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> <200511051849.jA5Inme18103@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105130112.039fc270@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:49 AM 11/5/2005 -0800, spike wrote: >scerir: > > > in California (remember Marcuse? and Angela Davis?), etc. > >Well, actually no, but I am not the most historically >savvy guy you ever met. This is awfully depressing, because without (actual or book-acquired) memory of the moderately recent past, there's no way one can sensibly attempt to estimate likely consequences of actions and strategies in the present and future. Spike, do you know that Greece, the "birthplace of democracy", was under fascist military rule when you were a child in the '60s and early '70s? Googling almost at random, see e.g.: ============ Woodhouse, C.M. The Rise and Fall of the Greek Colonels. New York: Franklin Watts, 1985. 192 pages. C.M. Woodhouse, a former British diplomat, Conservative MP, and Oxford fellow, has written several books on modern Greek history. In April 1967, a group of colonels seized power and held on to it until 1974. The Greek junta was known around the world for its suspension of civil liberties, torture of political prisoners, and brutal repression of a student revolt in November 1973. The regime was brought down primarily because the various branches of the military could only manage to conspire against each other when it came time to defend their position in Cyprus against Turkish forces. Many people believe that the level of CIA intrigue behind the junta was an important factor. This is true with Oriana Fallaci in "A Man" (1980), an overwhelmingly-dramatic biography of junta prisoner Alexander Panagoulis. Woodhouse concedes that the CIA probably had advance knowledge of the coup, but feels that popular opinion in Greece is also trying to scapegoat the CIA for a situation of their own making. With his Establishment credentials, Woodhouse cannot be expected to pursue the question. Regardless of what forces led to the coup, vice-president Spiro Agnew was openly pro-junta during his term, and Nixon, Kissinger, and Dean Rusk weren't much better. The junta, after all, was open to U.S. corporations, Greece was a NATO ally in a strategic region, and the Navy needed to homeport the Sixth Fleet there. ISBN 0-531-09798-6 ============== Not to know about Angela Davis, BTW, seems to me as strange as not knowing about Martin Luther King, whatever one thinks of her politics. Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 20:00:58 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:00:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105130112.039fc270@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Broderick > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 11:08 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia > > At 10:49 AM 11/5/2005 -0800, spike wrote: > > >scerir: > > > > > in California (remember Marcuse? and Angela Davis?), etc. > > > >Well, actually no, but I am not the most historically > >savvy guy you ever met. > > This is awfully depressing, because without (actual or book-acquired) > memory of the moderately recent past, there's no way one can sensibly > attempt to estimate likely consequences of actions and strategies in the > present and future... Ja Im working on that. Thank evolution for the internet. Your title of gen X *amnesia* suggests people who once knew but forgot. I don't recall ever having learned of these matters. In the 1960s and early 70s, rockets and space were everything. All politic debate was just squabbling over stuff that didn't really matter much, and would go away eventually. It was a cool dream. > > Spike, do you know that Greece, the "birthplace of democracy", was under > fascist military rule when you were a child in the '60s and early '70s? > Googling almost at random, see e.g.: I did not know of this, thanks! ... > > Not to know about Angela Davis, BTW, seems to me as strange as not knowing > about Martin Luther King, whatever one thinks of her politics. > > Damien Broderick Ja we had MLK force-fed to us in the public schools, but not Angela Davis. I went to wikipedia, learned that she was the big-haired person who wanted to do away with prisons. Hmmmmm, ok Angela, that sounds like a great plan, lets go right out and do that, even better idea than the huge afro. Not. (What was up with all that hair?) spike From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 20:28:09 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 21:28:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Blacklight pops up again In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051105202809.GG2249@leitl.org> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:14:19PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > Still sounds like crap: He's a notorious crank, and has been floating this for many years http://www.hydrino.org/ http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/h/hy/hydrino_theory.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrino_theory I'm surprised physweb actually made the mistake of giving air to that notorious pseudoscientist. > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1627424,00.html > > < Rick Maas, a chemist at the University of North Carolina at Asheville > (UNC) who specialises in sustainable energy sources, was allowed unfettered > access to Blacklight's laboratories this year. "We went in with a healthy > amount of scepticism. While it would certainly be nice if this were true, > in my position as head of a research institution, I really wouldn't want to > make a mistake. The last thing I want is to be remembered as the person who > derailed a lot of sustainable energy investment into something that wasn't > real." > > But Prof Maas and Randy Booker, a UNC physicist, left under no doubt about > Dr Mill's claims. "All of us who are not quantum physicists are looking at > Dr Mills's data and we find it very compelling," said Prof Maas. "Dr Booker > and I have both put our professional reputations on the line as far as that > goes." > -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 20:28:47 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 14:28:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105130112.039fc270@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105142355.039ecc38@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:00 PM 11/5/2005 -0800, spike wrote: >Your title of gen X *amnesia* suggests people >who once knew but forgot. I don't recall ever having >learned of these matters. Yep. *Cultural* amnesia is what I had in mind. The failure to transmit this sort of history to the kids. I would never use so horrid a term as, like, *ignorance*... :) And Spike is certainly one of those who does make an effort to backfill the gaps left by a, like, historically nescient cultural apparatus . >(What was up with all that hair?) I could never pose that question, it would look too much like bitter & twisted envy. Damien Balderick From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 5 20:45:05 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:45:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105204505.43676.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > (What was up with all that hair?) It was emblematic of the 60's thing. Long hair on young males, and huge, unstraightened hair -- called "an Afro" on melanin-gifted Americans of both genders -- was the chosen hair style of the sex,drugs, and rock n' roll counterculture. In that bygone age I, having been endowed with naturally curly hair, sported giant hair as well. I called it a "Hebro". But now, alas, it's bye-bye, gone gone. Best, Jeff Davis "We need to remind people that `aging' is just the traditional word contingently associated with physical decay due to the breakdown of cellular maintenance mechanisms, accumulated unrepaired damage, etc." Damien Broderick __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 20:46:06 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 14:46:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105130112.039fc270@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105143753.01c5e8a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:00 PM 11/5/2005 -0800, spike wrote: >Angela Davis. I went to wikipedia, learned >that she was the big-haired person who wanted to do >away with prisons. Hmmmmm, ok Angela, that sounds >like a great plan, lets go right out and do that... > >Not. A quote from her at the wiki: "Imprisonment has become the response of first resort to far too many of our social problems." Oddly, this sounds rather like your own complaint the other day, Spike. Can't find it now, but weren't you pointing out that we need the skills and labor power of the vast numbers imprisoned for victimless "crimes"? That would be a start. The value of jails in confining the bad bastards is presumably in isolating them from the rest of us for a time; the obvious fact that this hardens some and instructs all of them in better methods and motives for further crime suggests that doing away with today's prisons and finding better methods isn't really all that silly. Damien Broderick From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 20:47:13 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 21:47:13 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <200511050227.jA52RYe01417@tick.javien.com> References: <200511050227.jA52RYe01417@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105204713.GJ2249@leitl.org> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 06:27:30PM -0800, spike wrote: > In most of human history on most of this planet, they > probably would just shoot or hang the criminals. With > the modern legal system, there has never been a better > time than now or a better place than the west to be > a criminal. While I agree in principle, I would have used a past tense here. (At least, for some specific values of ethnicity or belief of criminals). I don't think there was ever a time to work with the bastards. Now if you want to start hanging them (impeachment is for wusses), now's the time. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 21:36:40 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:36:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511042040l65539632x43a5d68c541c7745@mail.gmail.com> References: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> <5366105b0511042040l65539632x43a5d68c541c7745@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051105213639.GR2249@leitl.org> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 10:40:19PM -0600, Jay Dugger wrote: > http://www.redcross.org > Please donate if you can. I disagree with that particular donation target. Your money is better spent with the Salvation Army (despite the Jesus freak and the misogynia angle). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 5 21:42:08 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:42:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia References: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <0bb101c5e251$ca25a420$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "spike" > (What was up with all that hair?) Tsk, tsk, tsk ... not only hair, but Hair gained iconic status in the 1960s: http://www.geocities.com/hairpages/ My Gen-X'r children saw a revival of Hair in the mid 1980s, and a year or two ago it played in Seattle (where I was amused to see a troop of tassel-loafered lawyers of-a-certain age getting some of the best tickets ... for their night of a little nostalgia). Olga From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 21:55:29 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:55:29 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic Freedom and the Fate of Dissidents In-Reply-To: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> References: <200511021454.jA2Es1e11016@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105215529.GV2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:53:54AM -0800, spike wrote: > Dirk, which country are you from? I am interested > in European politics to see how you guys solve the > pension problem. We yanks have a social security > fund that is supposed to go bust in 2038, but I > heard Germany and France are facing a similar > sitch with more urgency. Here's an interesting historic view on retirement and its funding in the US: http://www.eh.net/encyclopedia/article/short.retirement.history.us I understand that due to a need for investment in growth years in the early 20th century the self-financed saving part has gone away (at least, in more socialist places) for a social security type of taxation which is invested in current growth, with future promise of revenue (of course, the entire house of cards collapses with the population pyramid inversion and very slow or negative local growth due to globalisation competition). > I don't know that either right or left has a > good solution to this. If so I haven't heard it. I don't think there is an economic solution. If the automation and the redistribution part doesn't land instanter we're going to face either cars burning in the streets, or old folks poverty, or both. I'm only half joking (I've seen old folks begging in the streets with the collapse of the UdSSR, and it wasn't pretty). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 22:06:25 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 23:06:25 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> References: <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200510310459.j9V4xee31811@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105220625.GW2249@leitl.org> On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 08:59:11PM -0800, spike wrote: > Jack, why is full employment defined as success? Is not > the goal to have machines do our work, freeing us to do > whatever we please? That is what I would call economic That assumes that whoever owns the machines pays for your leisure. I'm not sure how this is supposed to work without imposing lots of taxation, and I don't recall you liking taxes. > success, even if everyone does not achieve it. Current redistribution of wealth across the global economy has resulted in effective reduction of wealth in old industrialized countries *for the working class* since the 1980s. Effectively, all these folks have to work more for less (of course, the growth in the rest of the world more than compensates for that). At the same time wealth concentration continues to occur, with total overall growth, but losses in the bottom parts of the histogram. Question is, what's going to happen when this equilibrates, and the developing and developed meet somewhere in the middle? And which technology will materialize (or fail to) to overthrow this nice Malthusian projection? (I haven't got the foggiest. I hope someone here can comment). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 5 22:09:05 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:09:05 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <200511050227.jA52RYe01417@tick.javien.com> References: <200511050227.jA52RYe01417@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: Since they are criminalizing huge numbers of people for what should never have been defined as a crime I find you comment callous and irrelevant to the original point. - samantha On Nov 4, 2005, at 6:27 PM, spike wrote: >> On 11/3/05 9:04 PM, "Matus" wrote: >> >>> >>> ... does the US imprison a higher percentage of it's population than >>> > Vietnam? Burma? Cuba? Saudi Arabia? ... > ... > > In most of human history on most of this planet, they > probably would just shoot or hang the criminals. With > the modern legal system, there has never been a better > time than now or a better place than the west to be > a criminal. > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 5 22:23:41 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 23:23:41 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: <200511030407.jA347Ae22700@tick.javien.com> References: <43698338.4040701@goldenfuture.net> <200511030407.jA347Ae22700@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051105222341.GZ2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 08:07:09PM -0800, spike wrote: > Market forces will eventually smash thru any law. There > is a steady market for recreational drugs. All attempts Any idiot can make recreational drugs in their kitchen, or import those from industrial-scale plants in the world where laws are weakly enforced. Drugs are easily consumed, too. Now a medical procedure takes trained specialists, a fixed location, and expensive hardware. This isn't something you can package into a gel cap. You can shut that place down in no time at all. > to stop it thru legal means have failed. If human enhancement > can be done profitably, there is no need to bother with > the politics; it will happen anyway. I wish it was that way. But the operating systems of our societies have definite impact on many services, medicine included. Whether it's abortion clinics, or (hypothetical) stem cell rejuvenation treatments, if they're banned locally, that's a threshold. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 5 22:26:47 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:26:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gen X amnesia In-Reply-To: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> References: <200511052000.jA5K0pe22416@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Nov 5, 2005, at 12:00 PM, spike wrote: > Your title of gen X *amnesia* suggests people > who once knew but forgot. I don't recall ever having > learned of these matters. In the 1960s and early 70s, > rockets and space were everything. All politic debate > was just squabbling over stuff that didn't really > matter much, and would go away eventually. It was > a cool dream. > What is more worrisome is that a LOT of us are still doing it. "Come MNT (or Singularity or strong AI) the political stuff won't matter." Sound familiar? - samantha From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 5 22:38:09 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 16:38:09 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Blacklight pops up again In-Reply-To: <20051105202809.GG2249@leitl.org> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051104201301.01ceb280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051105202809.GG2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051105163325.039a4480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:28 PM 11/5/2005 +0100, 'gene wrote: >On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:14:19PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Still sounds like crap: > >He's a notorious crank, and has been floating this for many years Yes. But my implicit point was that the Guardian newspaper (and the Institute of Physics' PhysicsWeb: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/4 **) haven't been running sober reappraisals lately of, say, George Adamski's flying saucers or the Hollow Earth theory etc. Just a slow news week? Damien Broderick ** < Now another theorist has joined the debate with a different point of view. Jan Naudts of the University of Antwerp in Belgium argues that the Klein-Gordon equation of relativistic quantum mechanics does indeed permit the existence of a low-lying hydrino state, although he stops short of claiming that hydrino states really exist (physics/0507193). "In physics the experiment decides," says Naudts. "Either the hydrino exists, in which case we have to accept a small correction to the textbooks on quantum mechanics, or it does not exist, in which case we have to find better arguments to explain why it does not exist." Naudts says that results of Mills and co-workers have recently been confirmed by a group at the Technical University of Eindhoven. "Nothing is decided yet, but I think it is time to fill the holes in our theoretical understanding of the hydrogen atom." > From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 5 22:55:07 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:55:07 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511052254.jA5Msxe01319@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 2:09 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Futures Politics > > Since they are criminalizing huge numbers of people for what should > never have been defined as a crime I find you comment callous and > irrelevant to the original point. > > - samantha When I refer to criminals, I do not include those who only do drugs. Using up prison cells for those is a strange modern aberration. And I'm not even a hard-core libertarian. spike From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 01:25:23 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 01:25:23 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: On 11/5/05, scerir wrote: > > From: "spike" > > > Specific question: they keep saying these > > are the worst riots since the 1968 student > > uprisings. What were they rioting about > > in 1968? > > In 1968 French students (and workers) were rioting > against the old politics (Gaullism), the 'establishment', > the old culture, and all that. But the same happened > in Italy, in Germany, in California (remember Marcuse? and > Angela Davis?), etc. > > Now *immigrants* (not just the old 'Pieds-Noirs', but also > arabs and people coming from east) are rioting, around Paris, > because they cannot get a job, because of money. The economy > in France (but the same thing in Germany, and in Italy, etc.) > is in bad condition. Our growth is < 1%. Your (US) growth is > well > 3%. More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits of integration. It's trouble that is only going to get worse. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sun Nov 6 01:52:20 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 20:52:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <436D61D4.8090707@goldenfuture.net> Someone check the thermometer in Hell. Dirk and I agree. I would add, it will get worse by spreading to Switzerland, Germany, Austria, etc. Joseph Dirk Bruere wrote: > > More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits of > integration. > It's trouble that is only going to get worse. > > Dirk > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 6 03:02:24 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:02:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Arthur C. Clarke and Islam [was riots in france] Message-ID: <000001c5e280$aa8f3390$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: Dirk Bruere Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] riots in france > More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits of integration. > It's trouble that is only going to get worse. Recently I ran into some discussions about sci-fi, Arthur C. Clarke, and his comments on Islam. "Clarke: Though I sometimes call myself a crypto-Buddhist, Buddhism is not a religion. Of those around at the moment, Islam is the only one that has any appeal to me. But, of course, Islam has been tainted by other influences. The Muslims are behaving like Christians, I'm afraid.": http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=clarke_19_2 and this: http://www.cs.rit.edu/~maa2454/SCIFI/sci_lit.html Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sun Nov 6 03:32:44 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 22:32:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Arthur C. Clarke and Islam [was riots in france] In-Reply-To: <000001c5e280$aa8f3390$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <000001c5e280$aa8f3390$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <436D795C.9070804@goldenfuture.net> One wonders when they _weren't_ "behaving like Christians". Conquering other lands, forcibly converting non-believers, killing those who don't comply, forcing non-believers into degrading behaviors, etc. etc. Joseph Olga Bourlin wrote: > *From:* Dirk Bruere > *Sent:* Saturday, November 05, 2005 5:25 PM > *Subject:* Re: [extropy-chat] riots in france > > More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits > of integration. > > It's trouble that is only going to get worse. > Recently I ran into some discussions about sci-fi, Arthur C. Clarke, > and his comments on Islam. > > *"Clarke:* Though I sometimes call myself a crypto-Buddhist, Buddhism > is not a religion. Of those around at the moment, Islam is the only > one that has any appeal to me. But, of course, Islam has been tainted > by other influences. The Muslims are behaving like Christians, I'm > afraid.": > > http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=clarke_19_2 > > > and this: > > http://www.cs.rit.edu/~maa2454/SCIFI/sci_lit.html > > > Olga > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From gregburch at gregburch.net Sun Nov 6 03:52:54 2005 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 21:52:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Arthur C. Clarke and Islam [was riots in france] In-Reply-To: <000001c5e280$aa8f3390$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: What a terrible dissapointment. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Olga Bourlin Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 9:02 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] Arthur C. Clarke and Islam [was riots in france] From: Dirk Bruere Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] riots in france > More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits of integration. > It's trouble that is only going to get worse. Recently I ran into some discussions about sci-fi, Arthur C. Clarke, and his comments on Islam. "Clarke: Though I sometimes call myself a crypto-Buddhist, Buddhism is not a religion. Of those around at the moment, Islam is the only one that has any appeal to me. But, of course, Islam has been tainted by other influences. The Muslims are behaving like Christians, I'm afraid.": http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=clarke_19_2 and this: http://www.cs.rit.edu/~maa2454/SCIFI/sci_lit.html Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 06:51:01 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:51:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Booke Review: A post-human Brave New World? Message-ID: Google Alerts informed me of a book review of Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near," by an engineering professor at the University of Toronto. It mostly goes about drawing parallels between the future Kurzweil predicts and Huxley's "Brave New World." Personally, I think the root of the dystopia in Huxley's novel wasn't the access to advanced technologies, but the all-controlling World State. Minus the totalitarian government, I think Huxley's world would be quite a desirable one to live in. Some snippets from the review: > Kurzweil is a technological fundamentalist, someone who is enthralled with > technology, but who frequently underemphasizes the human aspects. As an > example, he writes: "Two machines . . . can join together to become one and > then separate again. Multiple machines can do both at the same time: become > one and separate simultaneously. Humans call this falling in love, but our > biological ability to do this is fleeting and unreliable." > ... > Experiences such as those of S are not always known or appreciated by > technological fundamentalists who focus on "overriding, impersonal" forces > and are keen on pushing the boundaries of technology. Enhancing memory for > the disabled, such as Alzheimer's patients, may be a worthwhile and > achievable goal, but eliminating the limits of normal human memory would be > disastrous. > ... > > What is at stake here is nothing less than our vision of humanity. > Kurzweil believes we have "physical frailties" and "suffering brains" that > should be fixed. Others believe in the power of humanity and marvel at Tiger > Woods's golf swing, commuters navigating rush-hour traffic in Paris and > doctors eradicating smallpox from the planet. This latter view also believes > in the power of technology not to fix frail people, but to enhance > remarkable human capabilities. > > ... > > I believe that the answers Kurzweil provides are fundamentally misguided > and perhaps even dangerous. But his book is still valuable because it forces > us to think about how we would like to see technology used in society. What > kind of brave new world do we want for ourselves, our children and our > grandchildren? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 09:21:27 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 09:21:27 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Booke Review: A post-human Brave New World? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/6/05, Neil H. wrote: > Personally, I think the root of the dystopia in Huxley's novel wasn't the > access to advanced technologies, but the all-controlling World State. Minus > the totalitarian government, I think Huxley's world would be quite a > desirable one to live in. > > Some snippets from the review: > > > > What is at stake here is nothing less than our vision of humanity. > Kurzweil believes we have "physical frailties" and "suffering brains" that > should be fixed. Others believe in the power of humanity and marvel at Tiger > Woods's golf swing, commuters navigating rush-hour traffic in Paris and > doctors eradicating smallpox from the planet. This latter view also believes > in the power of technology not to fix frail people, but to enhance > remarkable human capabilities. > > Yes, but - a big BUT... Tiger Woods has had laser eye surgery to improve his eyesight above 20/20 and GPS range-finding devices are now legal in golf. The road traffic death and mutilation rates are an ongoing disaster. Antibiotic resistant mutations are appearing rapidly around the world, and doctors make many mistakes also. Humanity could do with a lot of enhancement. BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Nov 6 17:45:02 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 09:45:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: <436D61D4.8090707@goldenfuture.net> References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> <436D61D4.8090707@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: Funny, I know quite a few well-integrated Muslims. Looking back in history, riots, especially of the poor, are not generally religion- centric. These particular riots are not claimed, or led by any Islamic group. So is this a case of guilt by association and seeing evidence for what one already believes? - samantha On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:52 PM, Joseph Bloch wrote: > Someone check the thermometer in Hell. > > Dirk and I agree. > > I would add, it will get worse by spreading to Switzerland, > Germany, Austria, etc. > > Joseph > > Dirk Bruere wrote: > > >> >> More succinctly, Moslems don't integrate and still want the fruits >> of integration. >> It's trouble that is only going to get worse. >> >> Dirk >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 18:11:01 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:11:01 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> <436D61D4.8090707@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: On 11/6/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > Funny, I know quite a few well-integrated Muslims. Looking back in Obviously. If they weren't particularly integrated you wouldn't know them. Let me guess - those Moslems were well educated middle class professionals? history, riots, especially of the poor, are not generally religion- > centric. These particular riots are not claimed, or led by any > Islamic group. So is this a case of guilt by association and seeing > evidence for what one already believes? > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent feature of the European landscape. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Sun Nov 6 18:44:42 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 19:44:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] SwarmSketch Message-ID: http://www.swarmsketch.com/ (Clever !!) The web page says: =================================================================== Welcome to SwarmSketch: Collective sketching of the collective consciousness. SwarmSketch is an ongoing online canvas that explores the possibilities of distributed design by the masses. Each week it randomly chooses a popular search term which becomes the sketch subject for the week. In this way, the collective is sketching what the collective thought was important each week. (Due to increased traffic sketches are currently being updated after about 1000 lines) Each user can contribute a small amount of line per visit, then they are given the opportunity to vote on the opacity of lines submitted by other users. By voting, users moderate the input of other users, judging the quality of each line. The darkness of each line is the average of all its previous votes. Pumpkin Carving 2005-11-04 We are currently sketching "Pumpkin Carving", come in and contribute a line. Alternatively, you may like to browse the previous sketches and view animations of their progression. SwarmSketch was developed by Peter Edmunds as part of an honours project at the University of Canberra. If you have any comments or suggestions, =========================================================================== -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "The play's the thing." --Shakespeare From eugen at leitl.org Sun Nov 6 21:01:10 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 22:01:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <001f01c5de15$8d080640$0801a8c0@EF02jack> References: <200510301900.j9UJ0Ke07580@tick.javien.com> <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001f01c5de15$8d080640$0801a8c0@EF02jack> Message-ID: <20051106210110.GW2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 08:20:46PM +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: > All of the above is true enough - but the point was not that Microsoft are > bad. The point is that a rival and total alien 'economics of plenty' model Microsoft isn't bad. Microsoft is just the black hole of innovation. Nothing interesting or novel ever came out of Redmond. Not even visions. This might change at some point in the future, but right now it's the bastion of third-rate mediocrity, and a grave of good (nowadays second-rate) talent. > of doing business can not only keep up with the world leader - but in some > respects surpass them. All without the corporate support net that MS It took Firefox to tell you that? Dirty hippie software well predates Microsoft. Major pieces of software like Emacs, the gcc suite and Linux/*BSD operating systems were there well before Mosaic. > employees take for granted... > How many might have predicted that during the early 1990's? I've personally used mostly open source software end 1980s, and I'm just a babe in these matters. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From eugen at leitl.org Sun Nov 6 21:12:20 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 22:12:20 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Biochemistry text challenges students to find biological fallacy in cryonics In-Reply-To: <01ca01c5de18$3b6085d0$8998e03c@homepc> References: <01ca01c5de18$3b6085d0$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051106211220.GX2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 11:40:10PM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > "Death is essentially an irreversible loss of order. On dying, Death is essentially a decision on part of medical personnel based on best knowledge of the state of the art. http://ccforum.com/inpress/cc3894/abstract Critical Care 2005, in press doi:10.1186/cc3894 Published 31 October 2005 Abstract Contemporary intensive care unit (ICU) medicine has complicated the issue of what constitutes death in a life support environment. Not only is the distinction between sapient life and prolongation of vital signs blurred but the concept of death itself has been made more complex. The demand for organs to facilitate transplantation promotes a strong incentive to define clinical death in a manner that most effectively supplies that demand. We consider the problem of defining death in the ICU as a function of viable organ availability for transplantation. > cells loose their order on the molecular level by loosing their > ion gradients, enzymatically digesting their macromolecular > components, breaking down their membranes, etc. Thus, Rubbish. Some of these cryonics patients need to be shut down by meds orelse they would come back on life support. > although cells and the organisms they comprise appear to > change little on dying, the microscopic changes which occur > are profound and cannot be reversed by simply "curing" the > condition that caused death". What this boils down to is "we just redefined death, and since we don't know how to reverse these changes in the new definition nobody else can and will in future". That's a lot of implicit conditionals in that passage. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Nov 6 22:03:51 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:03:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Google maps + Social software mashup In-Reply-To: <436A4280.2040307@singinst.org> Message-ID: <20051106220351.50574.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> I put mine up there, but it didn't take the correct location. I centered the map on my house, but the shoutout has me in the middle of 85. I know I live life in the fast lane at times, but not quite *that* way... ;) --- Michael Anissimov wrote: > Fellow transhumanists, > > I found an interesting social software tool that allows you to share > your picture and location with others. It's called Frappr... quite > interesting. I created this one for transhumanists: > > http://www.frappr.com/transhumanists > > Just another tendril connecting the virtual with the physical - feel > free to add yourself! (You might want to state your Skype name or > MSN/AIM name as well.) Consider creating one for your favorite > transhumanist spinoff sect. Be careful with your shoutout - once you > > say something, only an admin can delete it. Have fun! > > -- > Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ > Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Nov 7 00:56:11 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 16:56:11 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rare to Medium Message-ID: <001e01c5e336$0c21d490$6600a8c0@brainiac> British Library and Microsoft to digitize rare reads. The two will work together to digitise around 1,00,000 [???] out-of-copyright books and deliver search results for this content through the new MSN Book Search service: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1286400.cms From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 01:03:25 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:03:25 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rare to Medium In-Reply-To: <001e01c5e336$0c21d490$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <001e01c5e336$0c21d490$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: Pity that they couldn't just donate some of their research money to project gutenberg ( http://www.gutenberg.org/ ) which has been doing this kind of thing for ages. They are up to 16000 or so, so depending on whether 1,00,000 = 100,000 or not, they are not too far off. Joel On 11/7/05, Olga Bourlin wrote: > British Library and Microsoft to digitize rare reads. > > The two will work together to digitise around 1,00,000 [???] > out-of-copyright books and deliver search results for this content through > the new MSN Book Search service: > > http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1286400.cms > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 7 01:30:33 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:30:33 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Dirk said: >Obviously. >If they weren't particularly integrated you wouldn't know them. >Let me guess - those Moslems were well educated middle class professionals? > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent feature of the European landscape. Dirk A 'self ghettoising and generally racially distinct underclass' - this appears to put the onus squarely onto these people I think. Isn't it just an exercise in shifting blame? Any 'middle-class professional' of any race or creed must find it a lot easier to integrate and achieve acceptance in a new country. Perhaps we should condemn the poor for their effrontery in not being middle-class and having a decent degree? Generalizations about Moslems are worthless. PEOPLE (of any race or creed) live in ghettos in any part of the world where they feel the need to support each other against a hostile environment. If the environment is not ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There are no Moslem ghettoes in Australia, or China for that matter - and NOT coincidentally there is a general acceptance and tolerance between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these places. If that peace should suddenly shatter because a few fundamentalists start start lobbing explosives, we might start to see a similar situation to the one developing in Europe and the US... Jack Parkinson From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 01:39:27 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 01:39:27 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/7/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > Dirk said: > >Obviously. > >If they weren't particularly integrated you wouldn't know them. > >Let me guess - those Moslems were well educated middle class > professionals? > > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and > generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent > feature > of the European landscape. > Dirk > > A 'self ghettoising and generally racially distinct underclass' - this > appears to put the onus squarely onto these people I think. > > Isn't it just an exercise in shifting blame? > > Any 'middle-class professional' of any race or creed must find it a lot > easier to integrate and achieve acceptance in a new country. Perhaps we > should condemn the poor for their effrontery in not being middle-class and > having a decent degree? > > Generalizations about Moslems are worthless. PEOPLE (of any race or creed) > live in ghettos in any part of the world where they feel the need to > support > each other against a hostile environment. If the environment is not > ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There are no Moslem ghettoes in > Australia, > or China for that matter - and NOT coincidentally there is a general > acceptance and tolerance between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these > places. > > If that peace should suddenly shatter because a few fundamentalists start > start lobbing explosives, we might start to see a similar situation to the > one developing in Europe and the US... > Jack Parkinson > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Mon Nov 7 01:48:11 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:48:11 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> Jack Parkinson wrote: > PEOPLE (of any race or creed) live in ghettos in any part of the > world where they feel the need to support each other against a > hostile environment. Then why do they move into a hostile environment in the first place? And then stay? "France treats us badly" they say. Well, then, move the hell out of France, rather than trying to burn it down. \Can't believe I'm defending France. Joseph From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 01:57:51 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:57:51 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: On 11/7/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > PEOPLE (of any race or creed) live in ghettos in any part of the > > world where they feel the need to support each other against a > > hostile environment. > > > Then why do they move into a hostile environment in the first place? And > then stay? > > "France treats us badly" they say. > > Well, then, move the hell out of France, rather than trying to burn it down. > > \Can't believe I'm defending France. They may move because their previous environment was hostile and were looking for a better life. On a more local level, people live in less friendly places because they can't afford to live in good neighbourhood. And they can't just decide to leave because they spent their savings in searching for a better life - and any money they have is needed to survive. Plane/train tickets are not free, just in case you thought otherwise. Joel From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 01:59:07 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 01:59:07 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/7/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > Dirk said: > >Obviously. > >If they weren't particularly integrated you wouldn't know them. > >Let me guess - those Moslems were well educated middle class > professionals? > > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and > generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent > feature > of the European landscape. > Dirk > > A 'self ghettoising and generally racially distinct underclass' - this > appears to put the onus squarely onto these people I think. > > Isn't it just an exercise in shifting blame? It's an observation. However, one of the fundamental features of real integration is intermarriage. For example, our Black population is intermarrying at an estimated 25-40% per generation. Why isn't this happening with Moslems? It wasn't Blacks who blew up the trains in London. Any 'middle-class professional' of any race or creed must find it a lot > easier to integrate and achieve acceptance in a new country. Perhaps we > should condemn the poor for their effrontery in not being middle-class and > having a decent degree? All the poor? Or only the poor who will not enter the mainstream of European life? It's not about poverty, but *culture*. Generalizations about Moslems are worthless. PEOPLE (of any race or creed) > live in ghettos in any part of the world where they feel the need to > support > each other against a hostile environment. If the environment is not > ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There are no Moslem ghettoes in > Australia, > or China for that matter - and NOT coincidentally there is a general > acceptance and tolerance between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these > places. And officially no moslem ghettoes in Britain - just places where disproportionate percentages of them live. If that peace should suddenly shatter because a few fundamentalists start > start lobbing explosives, we might start to see a similar situation to the > one developing in Europe and the US... > Jack Parkinson > AIUI China does have a problem with Moslem extremists. http://www.satribune.com/archives/apr11_17_04/P1_ziad.htm However, the Chinese response to such unrest as is occurring in France would be long spells in the gulag or a bullet in the back of the neck As for Australia, perhaps that has escaped the problems of Britain and France. The main difference (possibly) is that British Moslems are, in bulk, of mainly Pakistani origin and culture. Those of France N African. People tend to ghettoise with those who share language and culture. Maybe this has not happened to a large extent with Moslems in Australia because of their diverse cultural backgrounds and languages. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 7 02:08:35 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:08:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511070208.jA728We32636@tick.javien.com> > Dirk said: > >Obviously. ... > > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and > generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent > feature of the European landscape. > Dirk The burning-suburb dwellers are claiming that these riots are not about religion. They want the French government to stop sending imams, that this is about persistent poverty. Interesting if true. When the fly-in occurred on 9-11, a lot of us assumed it was about poverty in the middle east, destitute souls fighting back against the evil rich guys in New York. But then we learned that those particular jihaders were not particularly poor. Now when the marshmallow roast starts up in France, we assumed it was a jihad. Come to find out these rioters are not claiming to be particularly religious. It is quite the puzzle. But one can only feel pity for the French: sitting over there unarmed, with their own police force evidently helpless to stop this madness. spike From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 02:11:24 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 02:11:24 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <200511070208.jA728We32636@tick.javien.com> References: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <200511070208.jA728We32636@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/7/05, spike wrote: > > > > Dirk said: > > >Obviously. > ... > > > > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and > > generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent > > feature of the European landscape. > > Dirk > > > The burning-suburb dwellers are claiming that these > riots are not about religion. They want the French > government to stop sending imams, that this is about > persistent poverty. And why is it persistent? Where are the comparable riots by the indigenous poor? Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 7 02:35:12 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:35:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rare to Medium In-Reply-To: <001e01c5e336$0c21d490$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20051107023512.87389.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > British Library and Microsoft to digitize rare > reads. > > The two will work together to digitise around > 1,00,000 [???] Don't fret, Olga. They just ran out of zeros printing Bill Gates' last paycheck. Happens all the time at Microsoft. ;) > out-of-copyright books and deliver search results > for this content through > the new MSN Book Search service: Hopefully this won't be another attempt by Microsoft to profit off of intellectual property in the public domain. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 7 02:56:24 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:56:24 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:30 AM 11/7/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: >If the environment is not ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There are no >Moslem ghettoes in Australia, or China for that matter - and NOT >coincidentally there is a general acceptance and tolerance between >Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these places. well... from the Australian newspaper recently: ========= A call to hate and to prayer Support for holy war is being urged by Muslim preachers spreading their message in Australia, reports Richard Kerbaj, who visited mosques and heard voices shrieking with angst and passion 04nov05 A VOICE explodes through the speakers at Lakemba's nondescript Haldon Street prayer hall in Sydney's southwest during a Friday qutbah (sermon). About 400 men - Saudis, Indonesians, Somalis and Lebanese among them - are huddled shoulder to shoulder, seated or kneeling on the floor of the hall, above a gym. A few stare blankly ahead, others have their eyes shut and faces cupped with their palms, almost in a trance-like, meditative state. It's October 21, the middle of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, and Sheik Abdul Salam Mohammed Zoud, who has been living in Australia since the mid-1990s, stands on a platform at the front of the room reading his sermon in Arabic. "Ramadan is not a month for indolence," he screams through a lapel microphone, drawing on Koranic parables about the importance of annihilating al-adou (the enemy) and stressing the Koranic obligation of jihad (spiritual struggle or holy war) during the month of fasting. His voice can be heard clearly in the car park outside. "Ramadan is a month for jihad upon oneself and jihad upon the enemy," he says, a time when followers must become more disciplined in adhering to the message of the Koran, and more willing and prepared to topple the enemy of Islam: the West. Listeners nod approvingly as Zoud praises mujaheddin - guerilla warriors engaged in holy war - who are waging bloody battles against Western troops across the world, and implores Allah to grant them victory in their fight against the enemies of Islam. "Allah yinsur el-mujaheddin fe-Iraq (God grant victory to the mujaheddin in Iraq)," he screams, his voice crackling as he defies his own vocal range. He then repeats the message three times, each time screaming it louder and with more intensely. Twice at the end of the 35-minute oration in front of the men, who are mostly in their 30s and 40s, the sheik exclaims in a voice filled with angst and passion, blame and hate: "Inshallah (God willing) dark days will descend upon America soon." Two Fridays earlier, at a prayer centre at Michael Street in Brunswick, Melbourne's Muslim heartland, the man regarded as Australia's most radical imam, Sheik Mohammed Omran, stands before his mixed band of followers. Earlier, the men had left their shoes in the corridor and walked into the room. On entering the mussalah, they're greeted by whoever they make eye contact with. "Assalam alaikum" (peace be with you) is acknowledged by the person being greeted with "Wa-alaikum assalam" (peace be with you too). An A4-sized piece of paper on the wall reminds attendees to switch off their mobile phones. Some kneel and pray, others grab a copy of the Koran off the bookshelf at the back of the room, and read it quietly. Off-duty taxi drivers, suited businessmen on their lunch breaks and youngsters wearing baseball caps and tracksuits sit among the traditionally clad listeners wearing dishdashas (gowns) and sporting beards. Several Western converts, with fair hair and blue eyes stare at Omran, listening intently. While the 150 or so men watch the sheik, who stands on an elevated podium, hands gripping a railing, delivering a qutbah, women sit in a room adjacent, listening through a speaker. In the week following the second Bali attacks, Omran's Friday sermon, conducted in Arabic and English, talks about the fear Westerners have of Ramadan, as history has shown an increase in militant insurgencies and attacks across the world during that month. "The West know the meaning of Ramadan more than we do it seems," says the imam, who migrated from Jordan in the 1980s. "They fear the worst: unity. So what are we doing to unite and defeat evil?" He says Islamic unity and victory in the face of the West cannot be "stopped by George Bush or Tony Blair or John Howard". "If you don't unite, your faces will be smeared in dirt," he adds. Both Zoud's and Omran's prayer groups teach Wahhabism, a fundamentalist branch of Islam founded in Saudi Arabia in the 1700s that inspired the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan and is preached by the world's most notorious terrorist: Osama bin Laden, leader of al-Qa'ida. Yet the voices of such home-based extremists by no means define the majority of Islamic messages being preached by Muslim clerics across the country. Sheik Fehmi Naji al-Imam, one of Australia's most prominent Muslim leaders and the head of the Preston Mosque, Victoria's largest mosque in Melbourne's inner-north, isn't discussing politics during a Friday sermon last month. Instead, he is leading a group of more than 50 men through an Arabic prayer from the Koran. On completion, he sits at the front of the room and faces his followers. A junior cleric then sits beside Naji al-Imam and discusses the importance of praying to God and of not feeling a sense of helplessness or hopelessness should one suspect their personal prayer is not being answered. The cleric says people are often disappointed when their prayers for more financial wealth don't come to fruition. "You might pray for thousands of dollars and feel like your prayers aren't being answered," he says in Arabic. "But what you've got to remember is he might have saved you from a car accident and [thus] saved you $10,000." Zoud has formerly been accused of having links to terror suspects and recruiting for jihad. And although he has denied such accusations, he cannot deny the fact his prayer centre, located in Sydney's Muslim heartland, has attracted terror suspects, including Frenchman Willie Brigitte, arrested and deported to Paris in 2003 for allegedly plotting a bomb attack on Sydney's naval base; and former Qantas baggage handler Bilal Khazal, who is facing terrorism-related charges in Australia. Friday sermons at the Haldon Street and Michael Street prayer centres are predominantly geared towards political issues affecting Muslims across the world. The US and President George W. Bush figure prominently in Zoud's and Omran's sermons. "Last night, President Bush said that the so-called fanatic Muslims would like to build an empire reaching from Indonesia to Spain," Omran said during his October 7 sermon. "And he has not said anything as truer or more accurate. What is wrong with doing that? ... What are we doing to achieve that objective?" Omran's call to action goes even further during a Friday sermon at Michael Street conducted the following week by Harun Abu Talha, news editor of Mecca News, published by the Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jamaah organisation led by Omran. During the predominantly English qutbah, the cleric says: "We should not compromise our deen [religion] for the sake of peace." It is a message greeted by collective nods from a group of more than 100 men, many of whom were present at Omran's sermon the previous Friday. Abu Talha discusses the injustices and human rights violations taking place at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp where "so-called terrorists" are detained. "They lock up these so-called [Muslim] terrorists in subhuman conditions," he says. "You wouldn't even keep an animal like that." He urges listeners to "raise your voices" against those who "criticise your deen [religion]". "They criticise and ridicule our religion and have been doing so for a very long time." While Naji al-Imam's service is purely religious, Abu Talha, who is believed to be Bosnian, discusses "our brothers and sisters" who are dying at the hands of Western troops in Afghanistan and begins to discuss the importance of jihad before quipping: "We cannot say too much about mujaheddin in this country." The joke elicits sniggers and laughter from the group. Outside Sydney's largest mosque, the Lakemba Mosque in Wangee Road, which is known for its moderate preachings, a man in his late 20s is walking to his car following the Friday prayer. He opens his car boot and grabs a handful of promotional leaflets about Ramadan. Asked about his thoughts on extremist Muslims ruining the image of Islam, he says: "You got all kinds of Muslim here [in Sydney]. But it's always the few extreme ones who ruin it for the majority, brother." privacy terms ? The Australian From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 7 03:11:24 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 19:11:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] riots in france In-Reply-To: References: <200511051717.jA5HHje09682@tick.javien.com> <000d01c5e237$64707f20$fabc1b97@administxl09yj> <436D61D4.8090707@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: On Nov 6, 2005, at 10:11 AM, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/6/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Funny, I know quite a few well-integrated Muslims. Looking back in > > Obviously. > If they weren't particularly integrated you wouldn't know them. > Let me guess - those Moslems were well educated middle class > professionals? A mix of folks with a couple of blue collar families thrown in. But mostly middle class. > > history, riots, especially of the poor, are not generally religion- > centric. These particular riots are not claimed, or led by any > Islamic group. So is this a case of guilt by association and seeing > evidence for what one already believes? > > It is evidence of a religiously (self) defined self ghettoising and > generally racially distinct underclass that may well be a permanent > feature of the European landscape. Many distinct cultural groups were long self-ghettoized or ghettoized by external pressure is US history. Many of my older friends grew up in large cities that effectively had pretty separate Polish, Irish. Jewish, Puerto Rican, Italian and Black communities and sections of the city. Some of these fully qualified as ghettos. I don't think there is enough data here to claim that the problem is Muslim or one of Muslim separatism or self-ghettoization. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 7 03:13:26 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 19:13:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511070313.jA73DTe05965@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Broderick ... > > well... from the Australian newspaper recently: > > ========= > > > A call to hate and to prayer > > Support for holy war is being urged by Muslim preachers spreading their > message in Australia, reports Richard Kerbaj, who visited mosques and > heard > voices shrieking with angst and passion > > > 04nov05 > > A VOICE explodes through the speakers at Lakemba's nondescript Haldon > Street prayer hall in Sydney's southwest during a Friday (sermon)... The Renault-roast in France just doesn't sound much like the usual jihad: they don't seem to be focused on slaying infidels. They seem to be really raising hell big-time, maybe taking pot shots at the gendarmes, certainly starting as many fires as possible. But the true jihaders specifically wanted to kill as many infidels as possible. Otherwise these guys would be hurling firebombs thru the windows of apartment buildings instead of unoccupied cars. spike From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 7 03:21:55 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 19:21:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] economics of scarcity to economics of plenty In-Reply-To: <20051106210110.GW2249@leitl.org> References: <200510301900.j9UJ0Ke07580@tick.javien.com> <002401c5ddcf$dc431600$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001f01c5de15$8d080640$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <20051106210110.GW2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Nov 6, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > It took Firefox to tell you that? Dirty hippie software well > predates Microsoft. Dirty hippie software is pretty much where it all began. Including Microsoft. Starting even in the middle of the 60s and certainly in the 70s and early 80s. The suits didn't real show up that massively until the mid 80s. I was around when two of the long-haired techno-hippies unveiled a funny prototype built in a case that was a wooden box. There names were both Steve. Almost all the early hackers, some of which founded companies that became household names, were hippies in dress, choice of recreational drugs, social style and so on. I guess some of us qualified as "dirty". - samantha From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Mon Nov 7 03:24:14 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 22:24:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <200511070313.jA73DTe05965@tick.javien.com> References: <200511070313.jA73DTe05965@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <436EC8DE.4090909@goldenfuture.net> spike wrote: >The Renault-roast in France > Heh... love that term. Kudos! >just doesn't sound much >like the usual jihad: they don't seem to be focused >on slaying infidels. They seem to be really raising >hell big-time, maybe taking pot shots at the gendarmes, >certainly starting as many fires as possible. But the >true jihaders specifically wanted to kill as many >infidels as possible. Otherwise these guys would be >hurling firebombs thru the windows of apartment >buildings instead of unoccupied cars. > The worry is, that it will morph from the one into the other. It must be stopped before it does. They've already found a bomb-making factory. It's entirely possible that it's too late. Joseph From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 7 03:31:00 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 11:31:00 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Bloch" To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 9:48 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france > Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > PEOPLE (of any race or creed) live in ghettos in any part of the > > world where they feel the need to support each other against a > > hostile environment. > > Then why do they move into a hostile environment in the first place? And > then stay? For some groups - hostility is a fact of life - it's only the amount they actually suffer at any one time/place that varies. Where could you go if you were an African-American in the 1950's and 60's? Where could Jewish people go in 1939? What were the options for for French Protestants in 1560? Where could peaceful Iraquis go when they bailed out of their own country in the 1990's? What would you have done as an ethnic Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994? You may think of the world as a friendly place - but for many it isn't! > > "France treats us badly" they say. > Well, then, move the hell out of France, rather than trying to burn it down. >\Can't believe I'm defending France. There are not too many virgin continents to send a new Mayflower too! Jack Parkinson From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 7 03:40:19 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 19:40:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <02AF9D78-B7D0-4CEF-9AFA-73670B5A0DCB@mac.com> Did not some, even some of us, predict this kind of response from some Muslims when we attacked Iraq for (as we increasingly cannot deny) bogus reasons? Do we really expect attack and foreign occupation of Iraq to say anything good to most Arab Muslims about the US, its intentions or our ways? It was a disastrous move on pretty much every level. We will probably ride the reaction[s] as excusing even more disastrous moves. Just what the new century needed, a world-wide religion based hot and cold armed conflict. Great AI, please beam me up! It's a madhouse. - samantha On Nov 6, 2005, at 6:56 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:30 AM 11/7/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > >> If the environment is not ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There >> are no Moslem ghettoes in Australia, or China for that matter - >> and NOT coincidentally there is a general acceptance and tolerance >> between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these places. >> > > well... from the Australian newspaper recently: > > ========= > > > A call to hate and to prayer > > Support for holy war is being urged by Muslim preachers spreading > their message in Australia, reports Richard Kerbaj, who visited > mosques and heard voices shrieking with angst and passion > > > 04nov05 > > A VOICE explodes through the speakers at Lakemba's nondescript > Haldon Street prayer hall in Sydney's southwest during a Friday > qutbah (sermon). About 400 men - Saudis, Indonesians, Somalis and > Lebanese among them - are huddled shoulder to shoulder, seated or > kneeling on the floor of the hall, above a gym. A few stare blankly > ahead, others have their eyes shut and faces cupped with their > palms, almost in a trance-like, meditative state. > > It's October 21, the middle of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, and > Sheik Abdul Salam Mohammed Zoud, who has been living in Australia > since the mid-1990s, stands on a platform at the front of the room > reading his sermon in Arabic. > > "Ramadan is not a month for indolence," he screams through a lapel > microphone, drawing on Koranic parables about the importance of > annihilating al-adou (the enemy) and stressing the Koranic > obligation of jihad (spiritual struggle or holy war) during the > month of fasting. His voice can be heard clearly in the car park > outside. > > "Ramadan is a month for jihad upon oneself and jihad upon the > enemy," he says, a time when followers must become more disciplined > in adhering to the message of the Koran, and more willing and > prepared to topple the enemy of Islam: the West. > > Listeners nod approvingly as Zoud praises mujaheddin - guerilla > warriors engaged in holy war - who are waging bloody battles > against Western troops across the world, and implores Allah to > grant them victory in their fight against the enemies of Islam. > > "Allah yinsur el-mujaheddin fe-Iraq (God grant victory to the > mujaheddin in Iraq)," he screams, his voice crackling as he defies > his own vocal range. He then repeats the message three times, each > time screaming it louder and with more intensely. > > Twice at the end of the 35-minute oration in front of the men, who > are mostly in their 30s and 40s, the sheik exclaims in a voice > filled with angst and passion, blame and hate: "Inshallah (God > willing) dark days will descend upon America soon." > > Two Fridays earlier, at a prayer centre at Michael Street in > Brunswick, Melbourne's Muslim heartland, the man regarded as > Australia's most radical imam, Sheik Mohammed Omran, stands before > his mixed band of followers. > > Earlier, the men had left their shoes in the corridor and walked > into the room. On entering the mussalah, they're greeted by whoever > they make eye contact with. > > "Assalam alaikum" (peace be with you) is acknowledged by the person > being greeted with "Wa-alaikum assalam" (peace be with you too). An > A4-sized piece of paper on the wall reminds attendees to switch off > their mobile phones. > > Some kneel and pray, others grab a copy of the Koran off the > bookshelf at the back of the room, and read it quietly. > > Off-duty taxi drivers, suited businessmen on their lunch breaks and > youngsters wearing baseball caps and tracksuits sit among the > traditionally clad listeners wearing dishdashas (gowns) and > sporting beards. Several Western converts, with fair hair and blue > eyes stare at Omran, listening intently. While the 150 or so men > watch the sheik, who stands on an elevated podium, hands gripping a > railing, delivering a qutbah, women sit in a room adjacent, > listening through a speaker. > > In the week following the second Bali attacks, Omran's Friday > sermon, conducted in Arabic and English, talks about the fear > Westerners have of Ramadan, as history has shown an increase in > militant insurgencies and attacks across the world during that > month. "The West know the meaning of Ramadan more than we do it > seems," says the imam, who migrated from Jordan in the 1980s. "They > fear the worst: unity. So what are we doing to unite and defeat evil?" > > He says Islamic unity and victory in the face of the West cannot be > "stopped by George Bush or Tony Blair or John Howard". > > "If you don't unite, your faces will be smeared in dirt," he adds. > > Both Zoud's and Omran's prayer groups teach Wahhabism, a > fundamentalist branch of Islam founded in Saudi Arabia in the 1700s > that inspired the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan and is > preached by the world's most notorious terrorist: Osama bin Laden, > leader of al-Qa'ida. > > Yet the voices of such home-based extremists by no means define the > majority of Islamic messages being preached by Muslim clerics > across the country. > > Sheik Fehmi Naji al-Imam, one of Australia's most prominent Muslim > leaders and the head of the Preston Mosque, Victoria's largest > mosque in Melbourne's inner-north, isn't discussing politics during > a Friday sermon last month. Instead, he is leading a group of more > than 50 men through an Arabic prayer from the Koran. On completion, > he sits at the front of the room and faces his followers. > > A junior cleric then sits beside Naji al-Imam and discusses the > importance of praying to God and of not feeling a sense of > helplessness or hopelessness should one suspect their personal > prayer is not being answered. > > The cleric says people are often disappointed when their prayers > for more financial wealth don't come to fruition. > > "You might pray for thousands of dollars and feel like your prayers > aren't being answered," he says in Arabic. "But what you've got to > remember is he might have saved you from a car accident and [thus] > saved you $10,000." > > Zoud has formerly been accused of having links to terror suspects > and recruiting for jihad. And although he has denied such > accusations, he cannot deny the fact his prayer centre, located in > Sydney's Muslim heartland, has attracted terror suspects, including > Frenchman Willie Brigitte, arrested and deported to Paris in 2003 > for allegedly plotting a bomb attack on Sydney's naval base; and > former Qantas baggage handler Bilal Khazal, who is facing terrorism- > related charges in Australia. > > Friday sermons at the Haldon Street and Michael Street prayer > centres are predominantly geared towards political issues affecting > Muslims across the world. The US and President George W. Bush > figure prominently in Zoud's and Omran's sermons. > > "Last night, President Bush said that the so-called fanatic Muslims > would like to build an empire reaching from Indonesia to Spain," > Omran said during his October 7 sermon. "And he has not said > anything as truer or more accurate. What is wrong with doing > that? ... What are we doing to achieve that objective?" > > Omran's call to action goes even further during a Friday sermon at > Michael Street conducted the following week by Harun Abu Talha, > news editor of Mecca News, published by the Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jamaah > organisation led by Omran. > > During the predominantly English qutbah, the cleric says: "We > should not compromise our deen [religion] for the sake of peace." > It is a message greeted by collective nods from a group of more > than 100 men, many of whom were present at Omran's sermon the > previous Friday. > > Abu Talha discusses the injustices and human rights violations > taking place at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp where "so-called > terrorists" are detained. > > "They lock up these so-called [Muslim] terrorists in subhuman > conditions," he says. "You wouldn't even keep an animal like that." > He urges listeners to "raise your voices" against those who > "criticise your deen [religion]". > > "They criticise and ridicule our religion and have been doing so > for a very long time." > > While Naji al-Imam's service is purely religious, Abu Talha, who is > believed to be Bosnian, discusses "our brothers and sisters" who > are dying at the hands of Western troops in Afghanistan and begins > to discuss the importance of jihad before quipping: "We cannot say > too much about mujaheddin in this country." The joke elicits > sniggers and laughter from the group. > > Outside Sydney's largest mosque, the Lakemba Mosque in Wangee Road, > which is known for its moderate preachings, a man in his late 20s > is walking to his car following the Friday prayer. He opens his car > boot and grabs a handful of promotional leaflets about Ramadan. > Asked about his thoughts on extremist Muslims ruining the image of > Islam, he says: "You got all kinds of Muslim here [in Sydney]. But > it's always the few extreme ones who ruin it for the majority, > brother." > > privacy terms ? The Australian > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From extropy at unreasonable.com Mon Nov 7 05:51:16 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:51:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150@unreasonable.com> Jack Parkinson wrote: >There are not too many virgin continents to send a new Mayflower too! What an odd thing to say on this list. Sure there are. Trillions of them, just waiting. Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning. -- David. From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 7 06:08:02 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:08:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150@unreasonable.com> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051107000551.01cb6a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:51 AM 11/7/2005 -0500, David Lubkin wrote: >Jack Parkinson wrote: > >>There are not too many virgin continents to send a new Mayflower too! > >What an odd thing to say on this list. > >Sure there are. Trillions of them, just waiting. Second star to the right, >and straight on 'til morning. Yeah, and all those immigrant un[der]employed Muslims should just knuckle down and save up their spare francs and stop their whining and build a starship like the rest of us do. Or not. Damien Broderick From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Mon Nov 7 06:46:28 2005 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 22:46:28 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <20051107064628.GA13915@ofb.net> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 08:48:11PM -0500, Joseph Bloch wrote: > Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > PEOPLE (of any race or creed) live in ghettos in any part of the > >world where they feel the need to support each other against a > >hostile environment. > > Then why do they move into a hostile environment in the first place? And > then stay? The young ones burning cars were probably *born* in France. I'm no expert on France, but I know large labor strikes are more common and disruptive than here. Not that this is the same, but I wonder if in fact they haven't assimilated somewhat. "Large public disturbances R us!" -xx- Damien X-) From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 7 07:33:01 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 23:33:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] who sez we can't trust the commie press? In-Reply-To: <200511051841.jA5If5e17565@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051107073302.12506.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > The evidence is clear: those areas in the U.S. that > have resisted communus fluoridation, known as the > red states, seem to have greater problems with tooth > decay. For a minute there I thought you said truth decay. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 7 07:43:55 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:43:55 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France Message-ID: I suggest to take a look here: http://www.brook.edu/fp/cusf/analysis/immigration.htm Immigration Policy in France U.S.-France Analysis, January 1, 2002 Virginie Guiraudon, National Center for Scientific Research The latter part is particularly relevant: ================================================================== By the early 1990s, even though immigration in all categories of legal entries had fallen, Jean-Marie Le Pen's extreme-right National Front party was attracting a significant portion of the electorate with its demagogic demand to expel Muslim immigrants from France. Politicians across the political spectrum responded by arguing in favor of "immigration z?ro," and the right-wing coalition that came into power in 1993 translated the principle of zero immigration into policy. The "Pasqua law" of 1993, named after French interior minister Charles Pasqua, sought to stem the remaining legal flows in a variety of ways: by prohibiting foreign graduates from accepting job offers by French employers and denying them a stable residence status, by increasing the waiting period for family reunification from one to two years, and by denying residency permits to foreign spouses who had been illegally in the country prior to marrying. These repressive measures rendered formerly legal migration flows illegal. Thus today, in spite of a partial regularization of undocumented aliens in 1997, there are still many people living in France known as inexpulsables-irr?gularisables. This group-including rejected asylum-seekers from countries to which it is not safe to return, and foreign parents of French children-cannot be expelled, yet is not eligible for residency permits. They epitomize the contradictions of liberal democracies in the face of migration pressure, caught between respecting the human rights and norms embedded in domestic and international law, and an electoral logic that leads politicians to adopt a restrictive stance towards immigration. The 1998 Law on Immigration When Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin came into office in 1997, he chose the prominent political scientist Patrick Weil to write a report, L'immigration et la nationalit?, that laid the groundwork for a new immigration law adopted in 1998. Weil argued that the 1993 Pasqua law deterred foreign students and young professionals from settling in France. It thereby deprived the country of a source of human capital and undermined its national interests in the global competition for the brightest minds. Weil?s policy recommendations were in fact inspired by the American model, in particular the US visa provisions for highly skilled immigrants. The 1998 law on immigration created a special status for scientists and for scholars. Further measures introduced that year aimed at easing the conditions of entry for certain highly skilled professional categories. Computer experts earning more than 180,000 FF per year, and highly qualified temporary workers earning more than 23,000 FF per month, both benefit from a simplified procedure and, if they obtain a one-year permit, can request family reunification. Despite these reforms, France still appears to lag behind the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom in its quest for highly skilled mobile labor. Three years after the 1998 law on immigration and residency, France's political left and right appear to have agreed not to disagree on immigration, at least at the national level. The new consensus still privileges the restrictive function of immigration policy. And the emerging EU regime on immigration and asylum, negotiated by national interior and justice ministry bureaucrats, is also characterized by a general policy of restrictiveness. Yet, as the East Sea episode has shown, policy instruments such as visas and carrier sanctions that seek to prevent "unwanted" migrants from reaching Europe?s border have not stopped their arrival. They have instead criminalized the migration process itself, and raised the demand for smuggling networks and their lucre. France and the European Union today are witnessing the same perverse effects that the US experienced along its Mexican border, where new restrictions in some states only redirected flows to others, and raised the price of illegal passage. ================================================================== The part of France's policy regarding professionals is particularly interesting to me. I have a report in Italian from a workshop I attended last May about the 'Brain Drain' (from Italy, France, other EU countries), that I need some time to translate to understand more. I would like to know if France makes it easier or harder than Italy for skilled immigrants because at least France distinguishes skilled from unskilled workers; Italy does not. I'm in exactly the same illegal immigrant category in Italy as those that sneaked in by boat from Africa. Italy's present immigration policies, like France's were formed by extreme right ring factions (Fini.. former Fascist Party) of Italy's government. Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 7 09:43:33 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 10:43:33 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] [selected.by.rael@rael-science.org: [rael-science] La Haine: Schools, synagogues and hundreds of cars burn. It's Paris 2005] Message-ID: <20051107094333.GJ2249@leitl.org> Some background on the riots in France. ----- Forwarded message from selected by Rael ----- From: selected by Rael Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 03:13:25 +0100 To: rael-science-select at yahoogroups.com Subject: [rael-science] La Haine: Schools, synagogues and hundreds of cars burn. It's Paris 2005 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Reply-To: rael-science-select-owner at yahoogroups.com Source: The Independent http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article325153.ece La Haine: Schools, synagogues and hundreds of cars burn. It's Paris 2005 The 1996 hit film showed a French capital in flames as its underclass rioted. That was fiction. This time it's for real. Hugh Schofield reports from the streets of a suburb its inhabitants now call Baghdad-sur-Seine 06 November 2005 France's worst urban violence since 1968 spread this weekend, with riots in Toulouse, Marseille, Lille and Rouen after more than a week's unrest in the deprived areas around Paris. On Friday there were attacks on schools, a town hall and a synagogue, and more than 750 cars were burnt out. At least 250 people were arrested. At Aulnay-sous-Bois, one of the worst-affected towns in the eastern Paris suburbs, a group of five or six adolescents in baseball caps and hooded sweatshirts lounged last week in the parking lot of the notorious estate known as the City of the 3,000. Across the dual carriageway that fronts the grim complex, a Renault garage lay in black cinders. Police and passers-by took photographs with their mobile phones. Elsewhere in the town, which is in most parts a safe and genteel area not far from Charles de Gaulle airport, burnt-out cars littered the pavement. A faint smell mixing tear gas and smoke still lingered in the air. Among Abdelkarim and his friends, no one bothered to deny that they were in the thick of it the night before. "In the olden days this used to be a huge forest. It was called the For?t de Bondy. In those days there used to be highwaymen who cut the throats of the people in the carriages when they came through. That's what we are - like pirates," laughed Abdelkarim, 20. His story was of poverty, discrimination, dreams of his ancestral homeland of Morocco - and also of anti-Semitism, regular consumption of hashish and a swaggering satisfaction with his record of car theft, prison and violence. "Look around you - there is nothing here. We live four to a room. Our parents go to work like zombies. But we have nothing. Even the jobs around here go to people from elsewhere. This parking lot is like our living room," he said. The surroundings are indeed grim. The City of the 3,000 consists of a series of long low-rise buildings made of the cheapest 1970s materials and painted an unsavoury off-white. Patches of scrubby grass are covered in rubbish and upturned wheelie bins. "The police know us all by name. But when they come they still beat down the door and order our parents to lie on the ground. And when they ask where we are from, we give our addresses, but they say: 'You're not from here. You're from Africa,'" he said. Though he modestly declined the appellation, Abdelkarim is the local "caid" - the Arabic word means leader - and he happily boasted of the ?2,000 which he makes from each car stolen. "You want prostitutes, DVD players, jewellery? I can get anything you want," he said. One of his friends, Karim, aged 15, pulled back his sleeves to reveal gold bracelets and then opened his shirt to show a gold chain. Both nicked, he winked. Another boy held a mobile phone. "Come and look," he gestured, laughing. It was a short film of a Chechen guerrilla cutting off the head of a Russian soldier. These are the people who since 27 October have had the French government running scared. Their grievances - racism, poverty, lack of jobs - have changed little since the first disturbances in the banlieues broke out more than 15 years ago, later portrayed in the 1996 film La Haine (Hatred). But where before protesters demanded financial aid and change within the system, many of today's rioters seem motivated more by a nihilistic rejection of all that surrounds them. "I hate France, and the French hate us," said Abdelkarim. "The wicked get punished. See what happened after the Americans made war on Iraq? Allah sent the hurricane. We are getting our revenge." For President Jacques Chirac - and his uneasy cabinet tandem of Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin and Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy - this stark aggression is proof of the colossal failure of past policies to integrate France's five million-strong Arab minority. Successive governments have invoked the mantra of republican equality to block special measures to favour immigrants, arguing that the country's system of integration would work in time. But in practice Arabs continue to suffer from widespread discrimination in employment and housing. Unofficial statistics - there are no official ones - show that a hugely disproportionate number of young Arab males are in prison or out of work. Alienation has been fed by the almost total absence of Muslim or African leaders in politics and the media. While Britain has dozens of MPs and other public figures of African or Asian origin, France has virtually none. Meanwhile, there is the constant affront of being obliged to live in the bleak out-of-town estates that have become synonymous with deprivation and violence. Even before this latest wave of rioting, some 28,000 cars were burnt in small-scale riots in France in the first 10 months of the year. "From my window I can see the Eiffel Tower," said Abdelkarim. "But Paris is another world. This is Baghdad." Britain has had a different experience of immigration. Communities have been encouraged to maintain their identities - anathema in France - and moved into the inner parts of the main towns and cities. There is poverty, but employment. In Birmingham two weeks ago the riots were between two groups competing for space. In France the target is different: wealth, authority, the nation. Benyahya Makhlouf, a 53-year-old taxi driver who emigrated from Algeria 20 years ago, said that he sympathises with the protesters. "They packed them into these estates and it was like living in a cage. Of course they were going to explode," he said. "The children just give up." But Mr Makhlouf also supported the hardline policing ideas of Mr Sarkozy. "How am I supposed to inculcate the work ethic in my son, when his friends have Nikes given to them by their drug-dealer fathers? At least Sarkozy wants to restore order." The name evokes different emotions among the rioters. "Ever since Sarko came into the government, life has been merde," said Kamel, 16. "He treats us like dogs - well, we'll show him how dogs can react." On this point, he and the outspoken minister, who talks of "cleaning out" the "racaille" (riff-raff), are speaking the same language. He sees the riots as a clear attempt by the caids to take back control, and is determined to stop them. PAST PROTESTS From the storming of the Bastille, the image of Paris has been inseparable from that of revolution. Sanctified in the words of the 'Marseillaise', this reverence for the revolutionary spirit has lent a degree of legitimacy to violent protests. 1789 Mother of revolutions. The Paris mob - the sans-culottes of legend - overthrow the monarchy. Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette are guillotined 1830 The Bourbons, restored after Napoleon's defeat in 1815, are driven out as Paris rises up, sending Charles X into exile 1848 Amid unrest across Europe, a small riot in Paris causes the constitutional monarch Louis Philippe to flee 1871 After France's defeat by Prussia on the battlefield, riots break out again in Paris, giving birth to the revolutionary but short-lived Paris Commune 1968 Students pull up the Latin Quarter's cobblestones in revolt against Charles de Gaulle's rule. Workers go on strike too, weakening the government fatally ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jonano at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 10:20:48 2005 From: jonano at gmail.com (Jonathan Despres) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 05:20:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Please Join NanoAging Frappr for your support of my cause Message-ID: <6030482a0511070220q6a8a0b10yeac184373b511030@mail.gmail.com> Please Join NanoAging Frappr for your support of my cause http://www.frappr.com/thenanoaginginstitute Let me know, --Jon From kevin at kevinfreels.com Mon Nov 7 13:42:35 2005 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevinfreels.com) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 07:42:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com><009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer><6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <02AF9D78-B7D0-4CEF-9AFA-73670B5A0DCB@mac.com> Message-ID: <002a01c5e3a1$1cb5e650$0100a8c0@kevin> I just love this. Samantha has actually attempted to connect muslim riots on France to US activities in Iraq. What a stretch! Of course, no mention of the muslim ghetto people in the US rioting. AND of course, all the people being tortured and killed by the hundreds of thousands in Iraq by Saddam are turning in their graves wishing we weren't there as well. And what century before went without a relgion based world-wide conflict? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha Atkins" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:40 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france > Did not some, even some of us, predict this kind of response from > some Muslims when we attacked Iraq for (as we increasingly cannot > deny) bogus reasons? Do we really expect attack and foreign > occupation of Iraq to say anything good to most Arab Muslims about > the US, its intentions or our ways? It was a disastrous move on > pretty much every level. We will probably ride the reaction[s] as > excusing even more disastrous moves. Just what the new century > needed, a world-wide religion based hot and cold armed conflict. > Great AI, please beam me up! It's a madhouse. > > - samantha > > On Nov 6, 2005, at 6:56 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > At 09:30 AM 11/7/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > > > >> If the environment is not ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There > >> are no Moslem ghettoes in Australia, or China for that matter - > >> and NOT coincidentally there is a general acceptance and tolerance > >> between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these places. > >> > > > > well... from the Australian newspaper recently: > > > > ========= > > > > > > A call to hate and to prayer > > > > Support for holy war is being urged by Muslim preachers spreading > > their message in Australia, reports Richard Kerbaj, who visited > > mosques and heard voices shrieking with angst and passion > > > > > > 04nov05 > > > > A VOICE explodes through the speakers at Lakemba's nondescript > > Haldon Street prayer hall in Sydney's southwest during a Friday > > qutbah (sermon). About 400 men - Saudis, Indonesians, Somalis and > > Lebanese among them - are huddled shoulder to shoulder, seated or > > kneeling on the floor of the hall, above a gym. A few stare blankly > > ahead, others have their eyes shut and faces cupped with their > > palms, almost in a trance-like, meditative state. > > > > It's October 21, the middle of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, and > > Sheik Abdul Salam Mohammed Zoud, who has been living in Australia > > since the mid-1990s, stands on a platform at the front of the room > > reading his sermon in Arabic. > > > > "Ramadan is not a month for indolence," he screams through a lapel > > microphone, drawing on Koranic parables about the importance of > > annihilating al-adou (the enemy) and stressing the Koranic > > obligation of jihad (spiritual struggle or holy war) during the > > month of fasting. His voice can be heard clearly in the car park > > outside. > > > > "Ramadan is a month for jihad upon oneself and jihad upon the > > enemy," he says, a time when followers must become more disciplined > > in adhering to the message of the Koran, and more willing and > > prepared to topple the enemy of Islam: the West. > > > > Listeners nod approvingly as Zoud praises mujaheddin - guerilla > > warriors engaged in holy war - who are waging bloody battles > > against Western troops across the world, and implores Allah to > > grant them victory in their fight against the enemies of Islam. > > > > "Allah yinsur el-mujaheddin fe-Iraq (God grant victory to the > > mujaheddin in Iraq)," he screams, his voice crackling as he defies > > his own vocal range. He then repeats the message three times, each > > time screaming it louder and with more intensely. > > > > Twice at the end of the 35-minute oration in front of the men, who > > are mostly in their 30s and 40s, the sheik exclaims in a voice > > filled with angst and passion, blame and hate: "Inshallah (God > > willing) dark days will descend upon America soon." > > > > Two Fridays earlier, at a prayer centre at Michael Street in > > Brunswick, Melbourne's Muslim heartland, the man regarded as > > Australia's most radical imam, Sheik Mohammed Omran, stands before > > his mixed band of followers. > > > > Earlier, the men had left their shoes in the corridor and walked > > into the room. On entering the mussalah, they're greeted by whoever > > they make eye contact with. > > > > "Assalam alaikum" (peace be with you) is acknowledged by the person > > being greeted with "Wa-alaikum assalam" (peace be with you too). An > > A4-sized piece of paper on the wall reminds attendees to switch off > > their mobile phones. > > > > Some kneel and pray, others grab a copy of the Koran off the > > bookshelf at the back of the room, and read it quietly. > > > > Off-duty taxi drivers, suited businessmen on their lunch breaks and > > youngsters wearing baseball caps and tracksuits sit among the > > traditionally clad listeners wearing dishdashas (gowns) and > > sporting beards. Several Western converts, with fair hair and blue > > eyes stare at Omran, listening intently. While the 150 or so men > > watch the sheik, who stands on an elevated podium, hands gripping a > > railing, delivering a qutbah, women sit in a room adjacent, > > listening through a speaker. > > > > In the week following the second Bali attacks, Omran's Friday > > sermon, conducted in Arabic and English, talks about the fear > > Westerners have of Ramadan, as history has shown an increase in > > militant insurgencies and attacks across the world during that > > month. "The West know the meaning of Ramadan more than we do it > > seems," says the imam, who migrated from Jordan in the 1980s. "They > > fear the worst: unity. So what are we doing to unite and defeat evil?" > > > > He says Islamic unity and victory in the face of the West cannot be > > "stopped by George Bush or Tony Blair or John Howard". > > > > "If you don't unite, your faces will be smeared in dirt," he adds. > > > > Both Zoud's and Omran's prayer groups teach Wahhabism, a > > fundamentalist branch of Islam founded in Saudi Arabia in the 1700s > > that inspired the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan and is > > preached by the world's most notorious terrorist: Osama bin Laden, > > leader of al-Qa'ida. > > > > Yet the voices of such home-based extremists by no means define the > > majority of Islamic messages being preached by Muslim clerics > > across the country. > > > > Sheik Fehmi Naji al-Imam, one of Australia's most prominent Muslim > > leaders and the head of the Preston Mosque, Victoria's largest > > mosque in Melbourne's inner-north, isn't discussing politics during > > a Friday sermon last month. Instead, he is leading a group of more > > than 50 men through an Arabic prayer from the Koran. On completion, > > he sits at the front of the room and faces his followers. > > > > A junior cleric then sits beside Naji al-Imam and discusses the > > importance of praying to God and of not feeling a sense of > > helplessness or hopelessness should one suspect their personal > > prayer is not being answered. > > > > The cleric says people are often disappointed when their prayers > > for more financial wealth don't come to fruition. > > > > "You might pray for thousands of dollars and feel like your prayers > > aren't being answered," he says in Arabic. "But what you've got to > > remember is he might have saved you from a car accident and [thus] > > saved you $10,000." > > > > Zoud has formerly been accused of having links to terror suspects > > and recruiting for jihad. And although he has denied such > > accusations, he cannot deny the fact his prayer centre, located in > > Sydney's Muslim heartland, has attracted terror suspects, including > > Frenchman Willie Brigitte, arrested and deported to Paris in 2003 > > for allegedly plotting a bomb attack on Sydney's naval base; and > > former Qantas baggage handler Bilal Khazal, who is facing terrorism- > > related charges in Australia. > > > > Friday sermons at the Haldon Street and Michael Street prayer > > centres are predominantly geared towards political issues affecting > > Muslims across the world. The US and President George W. Bush > > figure prominently in Zoud's and Omran's sermons. > > > > "Last night, President Bush said that the so-called fanatic Muslims > > would like to build an empire reaching from Indonesia to Spain," > > Omran said during his October 7 sermon. "And he has not said > > anything as truer or more accurate. What is wrong with doing > > that? ... What are we doing to achieve that objective?" > > > > Omran's call to action goes even further during a Friday sermon at > > Michael Street conducted the following week by Harun Abu Talha, > > news editor of Mecca News, published by the Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jamaah > > organisation led by Omran. > > > > During the predominantly English qutbah, the cleric says: "We > > should not compromise our deen [religion] for the sake of peace." > > It is a message greeted by collective nods from a group of more > > than 100 men, many of whom were present at Omran's sermon the > > previous Friday. > > > > Abu Talha discusses the injustices and human rights violations > > taking place at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp where "so-called > > terrorists" are detained. > > > > "They lock up these so-called [Muslim] terrorists in subhuman > > conditions," he says. "You wouldn't even keep an animal like that." > > He urges listeners to "raise your voices" against those who > > "criticise your deen [religion]". > > > > "They criticise and ridicule our religion and have been doing so > > for a very long time." > > > > While Naji al-Imam's service is purely religious, Abu Talha, who is > > believed to be Bosnian, discusses "our brothers and sisters" who > > are dying at the hands of Western troops in Afghanistan and begins > > to discuss the importance of jihad before quipping: "We cannot say > > too much about mujaheddin in this country." The joke elicits > > sniggers and laughter from the group. > > > > Outside Sydney's largest mosque, the Lakemba Mosque in Wangee Road, > > which is known for its moderate preachings, a man in his late 20s > > is walking to his car following the Friday prayer. He opens his car > > boot and grabs a handful of promotional leaflets about Ramadan. > > Asked about his thoughts on extremist Muslims ruining the image of > > Islam, he says: "You got all kinds of Muslim here [in Sydney]. But > > it's always the few extreme ones who ruin it for the majority, > > brother." > > > > privacy terms ? The Australian > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 14:23:25 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:23:25 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanoaging Institute fraud Message-ID: <7641ddc60511070623n5aca8c63n18381338248c1342@mail.gmail.com> To all whom it may concern: I would like to state that my name is listed on the Nanoaging Institute's list of advisers without my permission. I have no connection to this institution. Rafal -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 7 14:32:16 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 22:32:16 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 26, Issue 8 References: <200511070744.jA77iIe00933@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <001901c5e3a8$12b09360$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: David Lubkin Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france To: ExI chat list Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150 at unreasonable.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Jack Parkinson wrote: >>There are not too many virgin continents to send a new Mayflower too! >What an odd thing to say on this list. >Sure there are. Trillions of them, just waiting. Second star to the >right, and straight on 'til morning. Can I hitch a lift with you..? Jack Parkinson From bret at bonfireproductions.com Mon Nov 7 14:39:11 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:39:11 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] prop 13 and public schools In-Reply-To: <200511051644.jA5GiJe07277@tick.javien.com> References: <200511051644.jA5GiJe07277@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: Your statement(s) seem to indicate that the state does not have intentions in this regard. Property tax is how you force growth. Each home added to a town costs the town money, which increases the property tax (among other things) which forces people with larger amounts of property to sell off parcels; which people build more houses on. Which increases town revenue, lather:rinse:repeat. This is pretty constant, and intentional. ]3 On Nov 5, 2005, at 11:44 AM, spike wrote: > But > property taxes in most yank states lack such controls: if > they raise them too much, people must sell their > property. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 7 15:37:07 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 23:37:07 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511070744.jA77iIe00933@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002201c5e3b1$1d660930$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Dirk wrote: >one of the fundamental features of real integration is intermarriage. >For example, our Black population is intermarrying at an estimated 25-40% >per generation. >Why isn't this happening with Moslems? I agree about intermarriage - this is an absolute hallmark of true integration. However it takes a generation or two to achieve. While the parents have the hang ups and cultural prejudices - the kids just do what comes naturally. Interesting examples - Afghan (Moslem) camel trains opened up the interior of Australia a century or more ago - and Moslems were the founding fathers and respected elder citizens of pioneer towns like Alice Springs. The Liddle family which owns vast tracts of Central Australia today (truly Texas-sized vast) is directly descended from these pioneers and is Afghan, Scots and Aboriginal (in about equal proportions). Further north, the black Chinese Ah Mat family hold corporate sway in the tropical regions of Australia's Northern Territory (part Aboriginal, part English, mostly Chinese) - and at least one family member was in the local parliament when I was last there. Both these families are at least part Moslem. Australia is an excellent example of a place where Moslems have intermarried for several generations and continue to do so now. There are (or have recently been) a number of distinguished Moslems in the legislature, and this group is represented at every level in society. I met my first Irish Moslem in Australia - and this type of cross-cultural marriage is common enough to be quite unremarkable, the intermixing is over a century old - by way of comparison, black/white liaisons were severely frowned upon in England up to at least the early 1960's. This does not mean everything is lightness and joy - there are a few Moslem fundamentalists inciting hate in Australia too. The trouble is - remarks like: >It wasn't Blacks who blew up the trains in London. Fall quite clearly into the 'hate' category as far as I can see... This kind of generalized remark about an entire group simply makes the ignorant assumption of homogeneity where heterogeneity demonstrably exists. Any statement that begins: 'All Moslems/blacks/Irish/Poles... (insert favorite despised minority here) is just a confession of personal prejudice, bigotry and ignorance... Damien mentioned fundamentalist zealots like Sheik Abdul Salam Mohammed Zoud, currently inciting violence and dissent in Australian mosques. He is a bigoted, ignorant, hostile blight on his religion if ever there was one. But you can no more condemn all Moslems for his failings than you can condemn all Catholics for the inquisition. People like him should be deported - if not jailed (inciting racial/religious violence is a serious offence in Australia) But we should be wary of 'collateral damage' when imputing the motives of individuals and aberrant groups to whole sections of the community. Ok - end of rant - but how many times must this point be made? Historically, we have had this lesson rammed home time after time in the last hundred years. If even intelligent people continue to be seduced by the easy transference of blame to 'them' - then the next horrific genocide just looms that bit closer... Jack Parkinson From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 7 16:20:31 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 10:20:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Please Join NanoAging Frappr for your support of my cause In-Reply-To: <6030482a0511070220q6a8a0b10yeac184373b511030@mail.gmail.co m> References: <6030482a0511070220q6a8a0b10yeac184373b511030@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051107101637.03453d30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:20 AM 11/7/2005 -0500, Jonathan Despres wrote: >Please Join NanoAging Frappr for your support of my cause > >http://www.frappr.com/thenanoaginginstitute I pass along, with no comment, these posts from two of the experts listed at that site. Mr. Despres? ========= >You should know that I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THEIR BOARD OF ADVISORS. >I agreed to consider the position if and only if they removed Ronald Klatz >from their Board. >Since they did not do so, I declined to become such a member and have >informed Despres >of this. My name on their website constitutes fraud and >misrepresentation. I urge you >to inform anyone else of this whom you can. > >Yours sincerely, > >Michael Fossel >Michael Fossel, M.D., Ph.D. >Professor of Medicine >Michigan State University ======================= and: ============= To all whom it may concern: I would like to state that my name is listed on the Nanoaging Institute's list of advisers without my permission. I have no connection to this institution. Rafal -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. ====================== Damien Broderick From extropy at unreasonable.com Mon Nov 7 17:41:35 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 12:41:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051107000551.01cb6a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150@unreasonable.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051107000551.01cb6a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107092621.06ecccd0@unreasonable.com> Damien Broderick wrote: >Yeah, and all those immigrant un[der]employed Muslims should just >knuckle down and save up their spare francs and stop their whining >and build a starship like the rest of us do. > >Or not. My point was that there were (1) new places to go to, (2) where people who find their current circumstances intolerable could go, not whether (3) these particular people can afford to go. Check out Freeman Dyson's cost analysis in "Pilgrims, Saints and Spacemen," _Disturbing the Universe_, pp 118-26 (1979). His reasoning seems sound, and comparably rigorous to Thomas Sowell's treatment of similar questions. The Mayflower expedition -- which is, after all, what Jack referred to -- cost 7.5 man-years of wages per family. The colonists borrowed the funds from investors who stayed home. It took them 22 years to pay off this debt. Dyson believe(d | s) that it is essential to have a frontier as a social safety valve and that we had to get launch costs down to a comparable price before colonizing the asteroids was plausible. Both make sense to me, and I think we could have done this decades ago. I wonder which groups would set out, were it an option today. Of course, when they got there, they'd find a Chabad center on the next rock..... -- David. From diegocaleiro at terra.com.br Mon Nov 7 20:04:13 2005 From: diegocaleiro at terra.com.br (Diego Caleiro) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 18:04:13 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience Institute DVDs available In-Reply-To: <436B8075.9090201@singinst.org> References: <436B8075.9090201@singinst.org> Message-ID: <200511071804.13343.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Michael, can you send me an e-mail or phone to get in touch with them so that I figure out how to receive this in Brazil? Thanks Diego Caleiro Em Sexta 04 Novembro 2005 13:38, Michael Anissimov escreveu: > Talks given at the recent inaugural symposium for the Redwood Center for > Theoretical Neuroscience Institute (a formerly independent non-profit > funded by Jeff Hawkins, now part of UC Berkeley) are now available as a > DVD. To order, send $5 to: > > *DVD - Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience* > Attn: Guadalupe P. Brandon > University of California > 132 Barker Hall #3190 > Berkeley, CA 94720-3190 > USA > > Make the check out to "UC Regents". Talks included are: > > *Horace Barlow, Cambridge University* > "The Roles of Theory, Commonsense, and Guesswork in Neuroscience" > *Dan Kersten, University of Minnesota* > "Human Object Perception: Theory, Psychophysics & Imaging" > *Sue Becker, McMaster University* > "The role of the hippocampus in memory, contextual gating, stress and > depression" > *Florentin Worgotter, University of Goettingen* > "Learning in Neurons and Robots" > *Discussion* > The Role and Future Prospects for Math/Computational Theories in > Neuroscience > *David Heeger, New York University* > "What fMRI Can Tell Us about How Visual Cortex Works" > *Kevan Martin, ETH/UNI Zurich* > "Canonical Circuits for Neocortex" > *Terry Sejnowski, Salk Institute* > "Dendritic Darwinism" > *Jeff Hawkins, Numenta* > "Prospects and Problems of Cortical Theory" > > This is the cutting edge of neuroscience research. Seems quite > fascinating. I can't wait to check it out! From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 7 20:50:35 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:50:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <002a01c5e3a1$1cb5e650$0100a8c0@kevin> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051106205417.01d14660@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <02AF9D78-B7D0-4CEF-9AFA-73670B5A0DCB@mac.com> <002a01c5e3a1$1cb5e650$0100a8c0@kevin> Message-ID: They aren't "muslim riots" in the first place. I was responding to an article about some Australian Muslim remarks by some religious leader or not. Which you are quite aware of if you bother to read. So keep your snide remarks unwritten. - samantha On Nov 7, 2005, at 5:42 AM, kevinfreels.com wrote: > I just love this. Samantha has actually attempted to connect muslim > riots on > France to US activities in Iraq. What a stretch! Of course, no > mention of > the muslim ghetto people in the US rioting. AND of course, all the > people > being tortured and killed by the hundreds of thousands in Iraq by > Saddam > are turning in their graves wishing we weren't there as well. And what > century before went without a relgion based world-wide conflict? > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Samantha Atkins" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:40 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france > > > >> Did not some, even some of us, predict this kind of response from >> some Muslims when we attacked Iraq for (as we increasingly cannot >> deny) bogus reasons? Do we really expect attack and foreign >> occupation of Iraq to say anything good to most Arab Muslims about >> the US, its intentions or our ways? It was a disastrous move on >> pretty much every level. We will probably ride the reaction[s] as >> excusing even more disastrous moves. Just what the new century >> needed, a world-wide religion based hot and cold armed conflict. >> Great AI, please beam me up! It's a madhouse. >> >> - samantha >> >> On Nov 6, 2005, at 6:56 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: >> >> >>> At 09:30 AM 11/7/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> If the environment is not ostile - the ghettoes disappear. There >>>> are no Moslem ghettoes in Australia, or China for that matter - >>>> and NOT coincidentally there is a general acceptance and tolerance >>>> between Moslem/Christian/Buddhists in these places. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> well... from the Australian newspaper recently: >>> >>> ========= >>> >>> >>> A call to hate and to prayer >>> >>> Support for holy war is being urged by Muslim preachers spreading >>> their message in Australia, reports Richard Kerbaj, who visited >>> mosques and heard voices shrieking with angst and passion >>> >>> >>> 04nov05 >>> >>> A VOICE explodes through the speakers at Lakemba's nondescript >>> Haldon Street prayer hall in Sydney's southwest during a Friday >>> qutbah (sermon). About 400 men - Saudis, Indonesians, Somalis and >>> Lebanese among them - are huddled shoulder to shoulder, seated or >>> kneeling on the floor of the hall, above a gym. A few stare blankly >>> ahead, others have their eyes shut and faces cupped with their >>> palms, almost in a trance-like, meditative state. >>> >>> It's October 21, the middle of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, and >>> Sheik Abdul Salam Mohammed Zoud, who has been living in Australia >>> since the mid-1990s, stands on a platform at the front of the room >>> reading his sermon in Arabic. >>> >>> "Ramadan is not a month for indolence," he screams through a lapel >>> microphone, drawing on Koranic parables about the importance of >>> annihilating al-adou (the enemy) and stressing the Koranic >>> obligation of jihad (spiritual struggle or holy war) during the >>> month of fasting. His voice can be heard clearly in the car park >>> outside. >>> >>> "Ramadan is a month for jihad upon oneself and jihad upon the >>> enemy," he says, a time when followers must become more disciplined >>> in adhering to the message of the Koran, and more willing and >>> prepared to topple the enemy of Islam: the West. >>> >>> Listeners nod approvingly as Zoud praises mujaheddin - guerilla >>> warriors engaged in holy war - who are waging bloody battles >>> against Western troops across the world, and implores Allah to >>> grant them victory in their fight against the enemies of Islam. >>> >>> "Allah yinsur el-mujaheddin fe-Iraq (God grant victory to the >>> mujaheddin in Iraq)," he screams, his voice crackling as he defies >>> his own vocal range. He then repeats the message three times, each >>> time screaming it louder and with more intensely. >>> >>> Twice at the end of the 35-minute oration in front of the men, who >>> are mostly in their 30s and 40s, the sheik exclaims in a voice >>> filled with angst and passion, blame and hate: "Inshallah (God >>> willing) dark days will descend upon America soon." >>> >>> Two Fridays earlier, at a prayer centre at Michael Street in >>> Brunswick, Melbourne's Muslim heartland, the man regarded as >>> Australia's most radical imam, Sheik Mohammed Omran, stands before >>> his mixed band of followers. >>> >>> Earlier, the men had left their shoes in the corridor and walked >>> into the room. On entering the mussalah, they're greeted by whoever >>> they make eye contact with. >>> >>> "Assalam alaikum" (peace be with you) is acknowledged by the person >>> being greeted with "Wa-alaikum assalam" (peace be with you too). An >>> A4-sized piece of paper on the wall reminds attendees to switch off >>> their mobile phones. >>> >>> Some kneel and pray, others grab a copy of the Koran off the >>> bookshelf at the back of the room, and read it quietly. >>> >>> Off-duty taxi drivers, suited businessmen on their lunch breaks and >>> youngsters wearing baseball caps and tracksuits sit among the >>> traditionally clad listeners wearing dishdashas (gowns) and >>> sporting beards. Several Western converts, with fair hair and blue >>> eyes stare at Omran, listening intently. While the 150 or so men >>> watch the sheik, who stands on an elevated podium, hands gripping a >>> railing, delivering a qutbah, women sit in a room adjacent, >>> listening through a speaker. >>> >>> In the week following the second Bali attacks, Omran's Friday >>> sermon, conducted in Arabic and English, talks about the fear >>> Westerners have of Ramadan, as history has shown an increase in >>> militant insurgencies and attacks across the world during that >>> month. "The West know the meaning of Ramadan more than we do it >>> seems," says the imam, who migrated from Jordan in the 1980s. "They >>> fear the worst: unity. So what are we doing to unite and defeat >>> evil?" >>> >>> He says Islamic unity and victory in the face of the West cannot be >>> "stopped by George Bush or Tony Blair or John Howard". >>> >>> "If you don't unite, your faces will be smeared in dirt," he adds. >>> >>> Both Zoud's and Omran's prayer groups teach Wahhabism, a >>> fundamentalist branch of Islam founded in Saudi Arabia in the 1700s >>> that inspired the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan and is >>> preached by the world's most notorious terrorist: Osama bin Laden, >>> leader of al-Qa'ida. >>> >>> Yet the voices of such home-based extremists by no means define the >>> majority of Islamic messages being preached by Muslim clerics >>> across the country. >>> >>> Sheik Fehmi Naji al-Imam, one of Australia's most prominent Muslim >>> leaders and the head of the Preston Mosque, Victoria's largest >>> mosque in Melbourne's inner-north, isn't discussing politics during >>> a Friday sermon last month. Instead, he is leading a group of more >>> than 50 men through an Arabic prayer from the Koran. On completion, >>> he sits at the front of the room and faces his followers. >>> >>> A junior cleric then sits beside Naji al-Imam and discusses the >>> importance of praying to God and of not feeling a sense of >>> helplessness or hopelessness should one suspect their personal >>> prayer is not being answered. >>> >>> The cleric says people are often disappointed when their prayers >>> for more financial wealth don't come to fruition. >>> >>> "You might pray for thousands of dollars and feel like your prayers >>> aren't being answered," he says in Arabic. "But what you've got to >>> remember is he might have saved you from a car accident and [thus] >>> saved you $10,000." >>> >>> Zoud has formerly been accused of having links to terror suspects >>> and recruiting for jihad. And although he has denied such >>> accusations, he cannot deny the fact his prayer centre, located in >>> Sydney's Muslim heartland, has attracted terror suspects, including >>> Frenchman Willie Brigitte, arrested and deported to Paris in 2003 >>> for allegedly plotting a bomb attack on Sydney's naval base; and >>> former Qantas baggage handler Bilal Khazal, who is facing terrorism- >>> related charges in Australia. >>> >>> Friday sermons at the Haldon Street and Michael Street prayer >>> centres are predominantly geared towards political issues affecting >>> Muslims across the world. The US and President George W. Bush >>> figure prominently in Zoud's and Omran's sermons. >>> >>> "Last night, President Bush said that the so-called fanatic Muslims >>> would like to build an empire reaching from Indonesia to Spain," >>> Omran said during his October 7 sermon. "And he has not said >>> anything as truer or more accurate. What is wrong with doing >>> that? ... What are we doing to achieve that objective?" >>> >>> Omran's call to action goes even further during a Friday sermon at >>> Michael Street conducted the following week by Harun Abu Talha, >>> news editor of Mecca News, published by the Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jamaah >>> organisation led by Omran. >>> >>> During the predominantly English qutbah, the cleric says: "We >>> should not compromise our deen [religion] for the sake of peace." >>> It is a message greeted by collective nods from a group of more >>> than 100 men, many of whom were present at Omran's sermon the >>> previous Friday. >>> >>> Abu Talha discusses the injustices and human rights violations >>> taking place at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp where "so-called >>> terrorists" are detained. >>> >>> "They lock up these so-called [Muslim] terrorists in subhuman >>> conditions," he says. "You wouldn't even keep an animal like that." >>> He urges listeners to "raise your voices" against those who >>> "criticise your deen [religion]". >>> >>> "They criticise and ridicule our religion and have been doing so >>> for a very long time." >>> >>> While Naji al-Imam's service is purely religious, Abu Talha, who is >>> believed to be Bosnian, discusses "our brothers and sisters" who >>> are dying at the hands of Western troops in Afghanistan and begins >>> to discuss the importance of jihad before quipping: "We cannot say >>> too much about mujaheddin in this country." The joke elicits >>> sniggers and laughter from the group. >>> >>> Outside Sydney's largest mosque, the Lakemba Mosque in Wangee Road, >>> which is known for its moderate preachings, a man in his late 20s >>> is walking to his car following the Friday prayer. He opens his car >>> boot and grabs a handful of promotional leaflets about Ramadan. >>> Asked about his thoughts on extremist Muslims ruining the image of >>> Islam, he says: "You got all kinds of Muslim here [in Sydney]. But >>> it's always the few extreme ones who ruin it for the majority, >>> brother." >>> >>> privacy terms ? The Australian >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 7 20:54:59 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 21:54:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com><009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer><436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> <20051107064628.GA13915@ofb.net> Message-ID: <006401c5e3dd$845f41c0$ebc61b97@administxl09yj> From: "Damien Sullivan" > The young ones burning cars were > probably *born* in France. Worse. A good % of them are French citizens. Evidently their culture, their unemployment, the social 'divide' between them and the rest of French citizens, are the causes. But I would say that the problem is bigger. And worldwide. The power of single nations, and single governments, is very limited now, due to the increasing dynamical complexity of everything. http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1385 Following this link you can realize what happened in Caracas one year ago :-) There are no Arabs or Moslems there. What do they hate then? The poor Cr..... From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 7 21:06:27 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 13:06:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107092621.06ecccd0@unreasonable.com> References: <200511061900.jA6J0Ge30683@tick.javien.com> <009f01c5e33a$dc0f5d90$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <436EB25B.3020808@goldenfuture.net> <002001c5e34b$c37c9020$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <6.2.3.4.2.20051107004813.07b30150@unreasonable.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051107000551.01cb6a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051107092621.06ecccd0@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: On Nov 7, 2005, at 9:41 AM, David Lubkin wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > >> Yeah, and all those immigrant un[der]employed Muslims should just >> knuckle down and save up their spare francs and stop their whining >> and build a starship like the rest of us do. >> >> Or not. >> > > My point was that there were (1) new places to go to, (2) where > people who find their current circumstances intolerable could go, > not whether (3) these particular people can afford to go. At this point no one on Earth can go to these destinations at any price. If I missed something major then please acquaint me with the folks building the colony ship or even the next asteroid homesteaders or folks heading out to L5. I would be very interested. > > Dyson believe(d | s) that it is essential to have a frontier as a > social safety valve and that we had to get launch costs down to a > comparable price before colonizing the asteroids was plausible. > I agree of course. But we don't have access to space now and won't at the rate we are going for (very optimistically) over a decade. It will take much longer to have so much easy access to space and somewhere to go to take the "poor and huddled masses" off Earth's hands, if ever. So this smells like a sci-fi pipe dream. - samantha From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 7 21:23:58 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 21:23:58 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <002201c5e3b1$1d660930$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511070744.jA77iIe00933@tick.javien.com> <002201c5e3b1$1d660930$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/7/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > Dirk wrote: > >one of the fundamental features of real integration is intermarriage. > >For example, our Black population is intermarrying at an estimated 25-40% > >per generation. > >Why isn't this happening with Moslems? > > I agree about intermarriage - this is an absolute hallmark of true > integration. However it takes a generation or two to achieve. While the > parents have the hang ups and cultural prejudices - the kids just do what > comes naturally. If anything there has been a bigger Moslem population in Britain than a Black one. It has nothing to do with length of time in this case. Interesting examples - Afghan (Moslem) camel trains opened up the interior > of Australia a century or more ago - and Moslems were the founding fathers > and respected elder citizens of pioneer towns like Alice Springs. The > Liddle family which owns vast tracts of Central Australia today (truly > Texas-sized vast) is directly descended from these pioneers and is Afghan, > Scots and Aboriginal (in about equal proportions). That's partly because they had no choice but to intermarry - or not marry at all. There wasn't a large enough immigrant Moslem pool to 'keep to themselves', nor could they import more Moslems in the space of a few hours journey through arranged overseas marriages. The trouble is - remarks like: > > >It wasn't Blacks who blew up the trains in London. > > Fall quite clearly into the 'hate' category as far as I can see... This > kind > of generalized remark about an entire group simply makes the ignorant > assumption of homogeneity where heterogeneity demonstrably exists. So, who blew up the trains? Was it little old white ladies? However, I think I can stand behind the statement that 'not a single Black citizen bombed the trains in London'. Any statement that begins: 'All Moslems/blacks/Irish/Poles... (insert > favorite despised minority here) is just a confession of personal > prejudice, > bigotry and ignorance... Well, death to your straw man - because I didn't say 'all'. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From info at nanoaging.com Mon Nov 7 22:23:45 2005 From: info at nanoaging.com (The NanoAging Institute) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 17:23:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nanoaging Institute fraud References: <7641ddc60511070623n5aca8c63n18381338248c1342@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511070624k6d70553j5f59c5fc2ebd2264@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <016b01c5e3e9$ebdecee0$cb337a18@nomxx5ybrzvkgn> I got the permission from him, here is his email from him yes, sure Rafal On 10/6/05, dadadodo6 wrote: > Hi, > > Would you want to become the advisor for NanoAging? Only your > permission is required. > > --Jon > > > > -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" To: Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 9:24 AM Subject: Fwd: Nanoaging Institute fraud ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rafal Smigrodzki Date: Nov 7, 2005 8:23 AM Subject: Nanoaging Institute fraud To: extropians at yahoogroups.com, ExI chat list , Gerontology Research Group , Mitochondria Interest Group , sl4 at sl4.org To all whom it may concern: I would like to state that my name is listed on the Nanoaging Institute's list of advisers without my permission. I have no connection to this institution. Rafal -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Tue Nov 8 01:48:14 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 09:48:14 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france References: <200511071900.jA7J0Ae04981@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <001101c5e406$7f107990$0201a8c0@JPAcer> David Lubkin wrote: >The Mayflower expedition -- which is, after all, what Jack referred >to -- cost 7.5 man-years of wages per family. The colonists borrowed >the funds from investors who stayed home. It took them 22 years to >pay off this debt. This kind of investment is comparable to that being made by Asian boat people seeking a better life in Europe, Australia and the US. In China's Fujian Province for instance (one of the better known sources for such immigrants), a professional with a good degree might generally earn well under US $200 per month, but an illicit voyage to the west will cost at least US $10,000 and sometimes a LOT more. The voyage is likely to be very dangerous, the chances of being caught and returned are high - and the debt must be repayed for years. Traffickers in these human cargoes routinely murder, rob and rape their passengers, some boats are simply scuttled - and every year many emigres simply vanish. The sheer grit and determination of these people matches anything the Mayflower crew did... Jack Parkinson From anissimov at singinst.org Tue Nov 8 02:13:18 2005 From: anissimov at singinst.org (Michael Anissimov) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:13:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] SL4 CHAT: Wednesday, 9 November, 6PM PST, 9PM EST Message-ID: <437009BE.7070808@singinst.org> The SL4 IRC chat has returned! This time, we're going to hold chats every quarter as opposed to every month. There will be a chat this upcoming Wednesday, followed by one in January, and an additional chat every quarter thereafter. What is "SL4"? The highest level on Eliezer Yudkowsky's Future Shock Level scale: http://yudkowsky.net/sing/shocklevels.html Feel free to attend the chat regardless of what future shock level you consider yourself to be, but note that the topics of conversation will be kept at an SL4 level. Also, consider signing up for the SL4 mailing list if you aren't already signed up: http://www.sl4.org/intro.html The four virtues of SL4 are Intelligence, Fun, Importance, and Future Shock. The chat topic will be an SL4 classic, seed AI. Recommended reading is here: http://www.singinst.org/LOGI/seedAI.html Chat participants should have read the above material completely, though not necessarily agree with it. (Though anyone can listen in.) The chat will be held at 6PM PST, 9PM EST, Wednesday the 9th. To participate through a standard IRC client, connect to "sl4.org" on a standard IRC port (for example, 6667) and join channel #sl4. (Type /join #sl4) To participate through Java applet, point your browser at: http://sl4.org/chat/ To clear up any confusion about timezones, go to http://www.time.gov/timezone.cgi?Pacific/d/-8/java to see the current time in Santa Clara, CA. Please join us! Best, -- Michael Anissimov http://singinst.org/ Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 8 03:12:46 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:12:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in france In-Reply-To: <001101c5e406$7f107990$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511071900.jA7J0Ae04981@tick.javien.com> <001101c5e406$7f107990$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051107220221.06bfa708@unreasonable.com> Jack Parkinson wrote: >This kind of investment is comparable to that being made by Asian >boat people seeking a better life in Europe, Australia and the US. : >The sheer grit and determination of these people matches anything >the Mayflower crew did... Exactly. Which is why once the way is open to colonize space at a comparable cost, many will go. Not for the space-specific dream that many (most? all?) of us extropians have, but for the panoply of historical reasons -- curiosity, adventure, material wealth, escape, freedom, or elbow room. -- David. From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 8 03:25:16 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 19:25:16 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] political ads on the phone In-Reply-To: <002201c5e3b1$1d660930$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511080325.jA83PCe28478@tick.javien.com> There is a law in taxifornia that if the politicos must tell who paid for any political advertisement. The law doesn't actually specify at what speed the "who-paid- for-this" bit must be revealed. Since we have an election tomorrow, I have been finding ads on my answering machine every day. This evening I played back an ad from a sincere-sounding surgeon explaining why a particular proposition will help her poor patients pay for their meds. Then it got to "paid for by zippity yikkity yikkity yikkity..." like an LP on 78 (ask your parents). I listened to it about four times. It was so hilarious I will probably vote for it just because they gave me a good laugh. spike From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 8 03:54:31 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 19:54:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jonathan Despres is a serious probelm wasRe: [extropy-chat] Please Join NanoAging... In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051107101637.03453d30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051108035431.69914.qmail@web60016.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > I pass along, with no comment, these posts from two > of the experts listed at that site. Mr. Despres? > I, however, will provide a comment. This is not easy for me. Sending up a red flag with a person's name one it. Yet it appears to be necessary. Jonathan Despres is the single most dangerous individual to have invited himself into the cryonics/transhumanist community, in the 8-9 years I have been around. Dangerous most particularly to the cryonics enterprise. http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=27334 The problem posed by Despres would be easier to deal with if it was simply a case of a malicious personality. However, that's not the situation. Rather it appears that Despres suffers from some sort of mental problem. From the link below, in is own words: "Because of my disease called Social Anxiety or Social Phobia, I would need a telephonist. I hate to call people over the phone." http://groups.google.com/group/sci.cryonics/browse_thread/thread/fcd0dc764bb213e5/73e43e6c1fa37bb1#73e43e6c1fa37bb1 I suspect that his aberrant, destructive behavior will only come to an end as a consequence of legal action. Meanwhile, in an effort to minimize the damage he is inevitably -- delusionally -- going to cause, I recommend everyone be aware of the problem, and take the time to inform anyone not already up to speed. Jonathan Despres is trouble. He has set up a superficially impressive, yet vaporware website, and is set on a course to screw over anyone who, unaware of the mental aberration behind it, buys into the seeming-legitimacy of his web activity. This is no drill. Jeff Davis __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From jonano at gmail.com Tue Nov 8 05:51:19 2005 From: jonano at gmail.com (Jonathan Despres) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 00:51:19 -0500 Subject: Jonathan Despres is a serious probelm wasRe: [extropy-chat] Please Join NanoAging... Message-ID: <6030482a0511072151i60d6f3bew76b2247d5e009bab@mail.gmail.com> "I suspect that his aberrant, destructive behavior will only come to an end as a consequence of legal action." Where do you see that I am destructive with my project? Only the wikipedia thing? I know it`s an error, I just wanted to make my cause more popular, which is a good cause, the best one I think on earth. Beside wikipedia, I dont see where I am destructive with my projects and my web site. --Jon From jonano at gmail.com Tue Nov 8 06:14:39 2005 From: jonano at gmail.com (Jonathan Despres) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 01:14:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The statistics of NanoAging are good (its very popular) Message-ID: <6030482a0511072214j786e1eb5s33c2ff83534cd4b7@mail.gmail.com> the statistics of NanoAging are growing and NanoAging is already very popular, just look to my stats page here: http://www.nanoaging.com/modules.php?name=AWStats My users enjoy my work, Im constructive --Jon From max at maxmore.com Tue Nov 8 15:44:49 2005 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 09:44:49 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108093417.04db8cd8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> As many of you know, I've been working on the Proactionary Principle (ProP for short) as a replacement for the widely-used precautionary principle. The ProP is now the center of the book I'm halfway through writing. I would very much appreciate your feedback on the current version, so that I can make any final tweaks before committing it to publication more widely. The previous version (with seven sub-principles) is here: http://www.extropy.org/proactionaryprinciple.htm The current version is as follows: THE PROACTIONARY PRINCIPLE Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new technologies. Assess risks and opportunities using an objective, open, and comprehensive, yet simple decision process based on science rather than collective emotional reactions. Account for the costs of restrictions and lost opportunities as fully as direct effects. Favor measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. Give a high priority to people's freedom to learn, innovate, and advance. We can call this "the" Proactionary Principle so long as we realize that the underlying Principle is less like a sound bite than a set of nested Chinese boxes or Russian matroshka (babushka) dolls. If we pry open the lid of this introductory-level version of the Principle, we will discover ten component principles lying within: 1. Guard the Freedom to Innovate: Our freedom to innovate technologically is valuable to humanity. The burden of proof therefore belongs to those who propose restrictive measures. All proposed measures should be closely scrutinized. 2. Use Objective Methods: Use a decision process that is objective, structured, and explicit. Evaluate risks and generate forecasts according to available science, not emotionally shaped perceptions; use explicit forecasting processes; fully disclose the forecasting procedure; ensure that the information and decision procedures are objective; rigorously structure the inputs to the forecasting procedure; reduce biases by selecting disinterested experts, by using the devil's advocate procedure with judgmental methods, and by using auditing procedures such as review panels. 3. Be Comprehensive: Consider all reasonable alternative actions, including no action. Estimate the opportunities lost by abandoning a technology, and take into account the costs and risks of substituting other credible options. When making these estimates, use systems thinking to carefully consider not only concentrated and immediate effects, but also widely distributed and follow-on effects, as well as the interaction of the factor under consideration with other factors. 4. Be Open: Take into account the interests of all potentially affected parties, and keep the process open to input from those parties. 5. Simplify: Use methods that are no more complex than necessary 6. Prioritize and Triage: When choosing among measures to ameliorate unwanted side effects, prioritize decision criteria as follows: (a) Give priority to risks to human and other intelligent life over risks to other species; (b) give non-lethal threats to human health priority over threats limited to the environment (within reasonable limits); (c) give priority to immediate threats over distant threats; (d) give priority to ameliorating known and proven threats to human health and environmental quality over hypothetical risks; (e) prefer the measure with the highest expectation value by giving priority to more certain over less certain threats, and to irreversible or persistent impacts over transient impacts. 7. Apply Measures Proportionally: Consider restrictive measures only if the potential impact of an activity has both significant probability and severity. In such cases, if the activity also generates benefits, discount the impacts according to the feasibility of adapting to the adverse effects. If measures to limit technological advance do appear justified, ensure that the extent of those measures is proportionate to the extent of the probable effects. 8. Respect Tradeoffs: Recognize and respect the diversity of values among people, as well as the different weights they place on shared values. Whenever feasible, enable people to make tradeoffs. 9. Treat Symmetrically: Treat technological risks on the same basis as natural risks; avoid underweighting natural risks and overweighting human-technological risks. Fully account for the benefits of technological advances. 10. Renew (Revisit) and Refresh: Create a trigger to prompt decision makers to revisit the decision, far enough in the future that conditions may have changed significantly. --------------------------------- Thank you, Max _______________________________________________________ Max More, Ph.D. max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org http://www.maxmore.com Strategic Philosopher Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org _______________________________________________________ From amara at amara.com Tue Nov 8 16:59:24 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 17:59:24 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Venus Express Launch 9November Message-ID: Hi folks, The first try of the Venus Express launch from the Baikonur Cosmodrome will occur at ~4am Europe (CET) time (8am Kazachsstan time). ================================================================ http://television.esa.int/default.cfm# Wed, Nov 09, 2005 | 03:10 - 08:30 GMT | 04:10 - 09:30 CET Venus Express Launch Live Coverage ESA TV Live The ESA TV Service will provide a clean feed of the launch of Venus Express, produced at Mission Control at ESOC in Darmstadt, Germany, with live images from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazachstan. The lift-off is scheduled for 03:33 GMT. A detailed running order for the clean feed is online under http://television.esa.int/photos/VenusExpress_09112005.pdf Not earlier than 100 minutes after lift-off, the separation of Venus Express from the Fregat upper launcher stage, will be confirmed from Baikonur, through live statements by Starsem DG Jean-Yves Le Gall and ESA Science Director David Southwood. Two press briefings at ESA-ESOC, scheduled for 06:00 and 08:00 GMT, will be televised live. They will feature ESA DG Jean-Jacques Dordain, Starsem Director Francois Maroquene and Venus Express Flight Director Manfred Warhaut. At the end of each press briefing, a B-roll with highlight images will be transmitted. More backgroud information can be found on: www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/ Eutelsat W2 at 16 degrees east Transponder B6, channel F (vertical), SCPC/4:2:0 F=11.172 MHz, SR=5.632 MS/sec, FEC=3/4 For the general public, a simulcast on Astra 1G is available, see http://television.esa.int/photos/Astra.pdf ================================================================ Amara (The institute I work in has two instruments (PFS, Virtis) on this spacecraft) From hibbert at mydruthers.com Tue Nov 8 17:16:38 2005 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 09:16:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108093417.04db8cd8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108093417.04db8cd8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <4370DD76.2010407@mydruthers.com> > Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even > critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for > those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new > technologies. Assess risks and opportunities using an objective, > open, and comprehensive, yet simple decision process based on science > rather than collective emotional reactions. Account for the costs of > restrictions and lost opportunities as fully as direct effects. Favor > measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of > impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. > Give a high priority to people's freedom to learn, innovate, and > advance. Your opening paragraph starts out in a descriptive style, but unexpectedly switches to imperative with the third sentence. I think the descriptive form was better suited as an introduction to the numbered list that follows. Let me try a rewrite to show you what I mean: Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new technologies. In order to ensure that we don't react precipitously to emotional prompts, we should assess risks and opportunities using an open comprehensive decision process based on science, the most objective evaluation tool humanity has developed. All major innovations have both direct and indirect consequences, though the indirect effects can be hard to predict. In order to choose the most beneficial course, decision makers should account for the costs of restrictions and lost opportunities as fully as direct effects. Since indirect consequences are hard to predict reliably, we owe it to ourselves to favor measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. In order to provide the best opportunity to learn and improve from both our successes and failures priority should be given to people's freedom to learn, innovate, and advance. Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://pancrit.org From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 8 19:05:28 2005 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 11:05:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version Message-ID: <20051108190528.F31BC57F30@finney.org> Chris Hibbert writes, responding to Max's document: > > Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even > > critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for > > those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new > > technologies. Assess risks and opportunities using an objective, > > open, and comprehensive, yet simple decision process based on science > > rather than collective emotional reactions. Account for the costs of > > restrictions and lost opportunities as fully as direct effects. Favor > > measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of > > impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. > > Give a high priority to people's freedom to learn, innovate, and > > advance. > > Your opening paragraph starts out in a descriptive style, but > unexpectedly switches to imperative with the third sentence. I think > the descriptive form was better suited as an introduction to the > numbered list that follows. Let me try a rewrite to show you what I mean: I noticed this as well, the transition is a bit awkward. However I prefer Max's punchy, imperative style. It is concise and to the point. A minimal change that would help would be to change the second period to a colon. This will ease the transition to the list of points. Alternatively it might be worthwhile to have a paragraph break after the second sentence (perhaps adding another sentence to the first paragraph to fill it out more). The sentences in the second paragraph could even be turned into a bullet list, like this: > Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even > critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for > those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new > technologies: > > - Assess risks and opportunities using an objective, open, and > comprehensive, yet simple decision process based on science rather > than collective emotional reactions. > - Account for the costs of restrictions and lost opportunities as fully > as direct effects. > - Favor measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude > of impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. > - Give a high priority to people's freedom to learn, innovate, and > advance. I agree with Chris that it is a little awkward to have a list of four imperative points here, as an introduction to a list of ten points (confusion exacerbated by the earlier claim that there will be seven points!). Still I thought his descriptive style was a little wordy. Maybe the whole thing needs to be rethought a bit in terms of the number of points being made in each section. Hal Finney From max at maxmore.com Tue Nov 8 19:14:43 2005 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:14:43 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <20051108190528.F31BC57F30@finney.org> References: <20051108190528.F31BC57F30@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108131307.052d83a0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 01:05 PM 11/8/2005, Hal wrote: >I agree with Chris that it is a little awkward to have a list of four >imperative points here, as an introduction to a list of ten points >(confusion exacerbated by the earlier claim that there will be seven >points!). Hal -- the seven referred to the number of points in the earlier version, for which I gave the URL. The version I posted does say "ten". I'll hold back my other responses for now. Please keep those productive comments coming. Onward! Max _______________________________________________________ Max More, Ph.D. max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org http://www.maxmore.com Strategic Philosopher Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org ________________________________________________________________ Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com --- Thought leadership in the innovation economy m.more at manyworlds.com _______________________________________________________ From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 8 19:38:37 2005 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 11:38:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version Message-ID: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> This is kind of off-topic and I don't mean for it to derail the progress towards completion of this statement. Certainly the principles advocated here will be a much better foundation for future progress than anything like the precautionary principle. Nevertheless I couldn't help recalling our discussion last month initiated by Robin Hanson, on the utility of scenario-based forecasting. (Thread title was "Inside Vs. Outside Forecasts".) Some of the advice in the proposed document amounts to creating inside-type forecasts, i.e. setting up scenarios, looking at probable outcomes, and making decisions on that basis. The paper we discussed last month shows that this forecasting methodology is not very good, unfortunately. It is prone to cognitive biases of many kinds. Unfortunately it is not clear whether there is a better alternative for predicting the future. As the discussion between Eliezer and Robin elucidated, there are certain reasons to expect the future to be like the past, and other reasons to expect it to be entirely novel and unpredictable. When we try to predict the effects of significant technological innovation, should we look to the past history of "similarly disruptive" technologies? Or is each new situation too novel for the past to be a useful guide? I didn't see a consensus appear. We didn't talk about it much, but actually the article we were discussing was mostly on another topic that is also relevant here, the management of risk in the corporate environment. At a certain level, business is all about taking risks. Successful risk management makes or breaks a business. Nevertheless the article identified a number of errors in how business executives evaluate and manage risks. In particular, most executives saw a major failure as being a career-ending proposition, while an equally spectacular success would have a more modest benefit. This causes them to be risk-averse, to the detriment of the overall enterprise. Another factor appears when decisions are delegated to subordinates. From the superior's position, failures by some of his employees can be compensated by successes by others. He would therefore like to see a greater level of risk-taking. But from the subordinate position, failure has an overwhelming personal impact, hence he will not take risks which are rational for the company as a whole. (Ironically, one of the points of the article was that these risk management errors, which cause businesses to be excessively risk-averse, may be cancelled by inside-style scenario forecasting, which tends to underestimate risk. This leads to an overall risk environment that may be roughly risk-neutral, which is the economically optimal position!) With regard to the Proactionary Principle, we are mostly looking not at corporate risk-taking, but at government and regulatory risk issues. This article did not go into that specifically, but there has been much work in this area as well. If anything, the risk environment is even worse in the regulatory field. A businessman who takes a successful risk balances a significant reward against the possibility of failure, but a regulator gets little or no reward and faces only the penalties from failure. The problem, then, is that even if Proactionary principles achieve success at the policy level, the mechanisms we have for risk analysis at the regulatory level may still undercut these policy goals by overestimating risks. Risk-averse regulation could result from even an ostensibly risk-neutral policy. On the other hand, if we could create mechanisms for a risk-neutral regulatory environment, my feeling is that this would go a long way towards achieving the goals of the Proactionary principle, even without explicit policy change. Risk-neutral regulation would by definition take into consideration the pros and cons of any given technology or other innovation. That is what most of the advice in the Proactionary Principle amounts to. Imagine, as a toy example, if regulators were allowed to profit from benefits created by new technologies they allow, while equally being penalized by harm those technologies might create. This would not be totally risk-neutral but it would be closer than what we have today. In such an environment I think we would immediately see innovative technologies being treated more favorably. In fact, I imagine that this is why any such proposal would be opposed at higher levels, because policy-makers understand that this would undercut their control over the regulatory environment. Overall, then, I agree that the Proactionary Principle is good policy. However, without addressing the details of how society evaluates and manages the risks of new technologies, any such policy faces obstacles to effective implementation. I would like to see support for such classic Extropian ideas as Idea Futures, Delphi forecasting, science courts, and other innovative mechanisms for more accurate forecast methodologies. This should be part of a general research effort towards evaluating how well different forecast mechanisms work, including traditional scenario based forecasts. I also think it will be necessary to look in some detail at how policy recommendations are implemented at the regulatory level. The regulatory risk-reward balance needs to be substantially redesigned as part of any change towards a more risk-neutral policy stance. Hal Finney From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 8 19:52:28 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 19:52:28 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108131307.052d83a0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <20051108190528.F31BC57F30@finney.org> <6.2.3.4.2.20051108131307.052d83a0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/8/05, Max More wrote: > > At 01:05 PM 11/8/2005, Hal wrote: > > >I agree with Chris that it is a little awkward to have a list of four > >imperative points here, as an introduction to a list of ten points > >(confusion exacerbated by the earlier claim that there will be seven > >points!). > > Hal -- the seven referred to the number of points in the earlier > version, for which I gave the URL. The version I posted does say "ten". > > I'll hold back my other responses for now. Please keep those > productive comments coming. > > Onward! Only one suggestion. That is, when this is finalised you do a highly condensed version which is essntially nothing but bullet points and soundbites. Something that can be appreciated at a glance (or at least in less than twenty seconds for someone of our reading speed). Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 8 21:24:46 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:24:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> References: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <4371179E.9060504@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > > Nevertheless I couldn't help recalling our discussion last month > initiated by Robin Hanson, on the utility of scenario-based forecasting. > (Thread title was "Inside Vs. Outside Forecasts".) Some of the advice > in the proposed document amounts to creating inside-type forecasts, > i.e. setting up scenarios, looking at probable outcomes, and making > decisions on that basis. The paper we discussed last month shows that > this forecasting methodology is not very good, unfortunately. It is > prone to cognitive biases of many kinds. Correct. I name also an additional cognitive bias: defensibility. Cost-benefit analyses aim at warding off anxiety about catastrophe, or blame in the event of catastrophe. Warding off actual catastrophe is a great deal harder. You do not realize this until you have written a careful, elaborate analysis of risks and benefits (such as appears in http://singinst.org/CFAI/policy.html) and then it turns out that Nature would have gone ahead and killed you anyway, even though you'd conducted a cost-benefit analysis. How unreasonable of Nature! What more does She want from us? At that point I first realized the incredible difficulty gap between fulfilling a deontological obligation to perform a risk analysis, and actually avoiding risk. You can always perform a risk analysis - it requires merely that you quantify your ignorance. There's no guarantee that survival is even possible - this requires nonignorance, and nonignorance can be arbitrarily difficult to obtain. It is in the nature of deontological social obligations that they tend to be fulfillable, which tells you something about their distance from the real world. George Orwell wrote: "In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness." Humanity can survive the loss of a thousand people, or a million people; it survives fifty-five million deaths every year. It is therefore appropriate to trade off the risk of fatal side effects against probable benefits of life-saving pharmaceuticals, to minimize net casualties. This is the argument which is too brutal for most people to face: it requires accepting that every now and then, even after performing a cost-benefit analysis, the Proactionary Principle will kill a few thousand people - loudly, visibly, in full public view. The Precautionary Principle kills many more people, but silently. If human beings did not age, but still suffered accidents, we would in no sense be immortal; we would live only until one of life's many dangers cut us down. The human species is like an unaging individual human; it has survived this far only because there has not been *any* significant, recurring danger of extinction. Once we enter the realm where existential risk becomes *possible*, it imposes a death sentence on humankind, unless the window of vulnerability is bounded, and small. No existential risk can ever be realized, even once. It is as if you did not age, but you were still vulnerable to all ordinary accidents, and you absolutely had to survive at all costs. The Proactionary Principle does not inculcate a mindset appropriate to such a task. It is the creed of someone who can never really be hurt, as humankind can never really be hurt by a pharmaceutical mistakenly approved. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From max at maxmore.com Wed Nov 9 00:08:59 2005 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:08:59 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> References: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108173743.05252c58@pop-server.austin.rr.com> I don't think your points are at all off-topic, Hal. (So long as this discussion doesn't displace constructive critiques of the Principle itself.) At 01:38 PM 11/8/2005, Hal wrote: >With regard to the Proactionary Principle, we are mostly looking not >at corporate risk-taking, but at government and regulatory risk issues. I do intend the ProP to apply in both private and governmental contexts, although the full-blown application of the Principle is indeed best suited to government and regulatory risk decisions. >This article did not go into that specifically, but there has been much >work in this area as well. If anything, the risk environment is even >worse in the regulatory field. A businessman who takes a successful >risk balances a significant reward against the possibility of failure, >but a regulator gets little or no reward and faces only the penalties >from failure. Yes--the classic problem of Type I and Type II errors. (I discuss that in my chapter, "The Perils of Precaution".) >On the other hand, if we could create mechanisms for a risk-neutral >regulatory environment, my feeling is that this would go a long way >towards achieving the goals of the Proactionary principle, even without >explicit policy change. The widespread affirmation of the Proactionary Principle (or something very similar) should make it much easier to get such mechanisms seriously considered and implemented. In addition, the ProP could serve as a touchstone by which to evaluate mechanisms proposed for that purpose. Especially relevant in this context is the second sub-principle: 2. Use Objective Methods: Use a decision process that is objective, structured, and explicit. Evaluate risks and generate forecasts according to available science, not emotionally shaped perceptions; use explicit forecasting processes; fully disclose the forecasting procedure; ensure that the information and decision procedures are objective; rigorously structure the inputs to the forecasting procedure; reduce biases by selecting disinterested experts, by using the devil's advocate procedure with judgmental methods, and by using auditing procedures such as review panels. However, now I look at this again, it seems to me that the text does not adequately express one of my major priorities: to specify the use of the most reliable, well-validated forecasting methods. This IS covered by "generate forecasts according to available science", but needs stating more clearly, I think. (The advisability of using such methods is the focus of my chapter on "The Wisdom of Structure", which immediately precedes the Proactionary Principle chapter. To sum up on this particular point: It makes sense to me to push for adoption of the Proactionary Principle *at the same time as* working to implement risk-neutral mechanisms. They should reinforce and complement one another. >Imagine, as a toy example, if regulators were allowed to profit from >benefits created by new technologies they allow, while equally being >penalized by harm those technologies might create. I like the idea. But how, specifically, would you implement this in a politically feasible way? Wouldn't it also raise potential problems, such as turning the regulators' job into a highly profitable one, thereby spurring nepotism involving those who appoint the regulators? (This isn't meant as a dismissal of your suggestion, which I think should be further explored.) >Overall, then, I agree that the Proactionary Principle is good policy. >However, without addressing the details of how society evaluates and >manages the risks of new technologies, any such policy faces obstacles to >effective implementation. You have my complete agreement! Strong public pressure for adoption of the ProP could have a highly beneficial effect on the regulatory environment, but its impact would be severely limited if not accompanied by structural and incentive mechanisms to shape behavior in accordance the Principle. It's probably easier to do this in business -- and there's an enormous literature on change management for this purpose [see ] -- although it's never *easy*. A good place to start would be with the economics of politics literature, and perhaps scanning the output of organizations such as the Cato Institute. (Suggestions welcome.) I know that the UK's Institute for Economic Affairs has published a fair bit of material on this, but probably more on the critical side rather than on how to reform regulators. > I would like to see support for such classic >Extropian ideas as Idea Futures, Delphi forecasting, science courts, >and other innovative mechanisms for more accurate forecast methodologies. >This should be part of a general research effort towards evaluating how >well different forecast mechanisms work, including traditional scenario >based forecasts. I see all this as part of the effort that naturally accompanies the Proactionary Principle. One of the next chapters I have to tackle is precisely on the relative reliability of various forecasting methods and how to choose between them. (That will be a tough one.) >I also think it will be necessary to look in some detail >at how policy recommendations are implemented at the regulatory level. >The regulatory risk-reward balance needs to be substantially redesigned >as part of any change towards a more risk-neutral policy stance. As above, I couldn't agree more. Onward! Max _______________________________________________________ Max More, Ph.D. max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org http://www.maxmore.com Strategic Philosopher Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org ________________________________________________________________ Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com --- Thought leadership in the innovation economy m.more at manyworlds.com _______________________________________________________ From fortean1 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 9 01:05:28 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:05:28 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Latest issues of World Law Bulletin Message-ID: <43714B58.6080809@mindspring.com> LATEST ISSUES OF WORLD LAW BULLETIN The three most recent issues of World Law Bulletin, produced by the Law Library of Congress but not publicly disseminated, have been obtained by Secrecy News. Topics addressed include "Israel's Construction of a Barrier in the West Bank and the Impact of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion" (October 2005), "Women's Rights Under Shari'ah (Islamic Law)" (August 2005), "Recent Developments in the European Union," and much more. See: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb/index.html -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 9 05:57:57 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 21:57:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation (iaging) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051005175827.0381e658@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051109055757.12964.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Extropes, Another report that suggests that a significant contributor to the degeneration asscociated with aging is the direct result of the "aging" of bone marrow repair/replacement cells. Which brings me once again to the question: if I extract some of my bone marrow, sort the various progenitor cells, repair, rejuvenate, or immortalize them, culture them to increase their number, and reinject them into my bone marrow, can I rejuvenate or "super-rejuvenate" my bone marrow progenitor cell repair/mainteneance capability and thereby achieve a substantial extension of my health and/or lifespan? http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-11/dumc-ivr110205.php The progression of the artery-clogging disease atherosclerosis is linked to the inability of specialized bone marrow cells to continuously repair damage to the arterial lining. ... "It appears that the disease progresses as the body's intrinsic ability to repair and rejuvenate itself somehow becomes deficient," __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Wed Nov 9 09:22:10 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:22:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 26, Issue 10 References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Dirk wrote: >So, who blew up the trains? >Was it little old white ladies? >However, I think I can stand behind the statement that 'not a single Black >citizen bombed the trains in London'. >>Any statement that begins: 'All Moslems/blacks/Irish/Poles... (insert >> favorite despised minority here) is just a confession of personal >> prejudice, bigotry and ignorance... >Well, death to your straw man - because I didn't say 'all'. Dirk No, you didn't - but if you meant your comments to be restricted to the actual perpetrators rather than the groups they (putatively) represent - then you phrased your critique pretty badly. AND - you are still phrasing it badly in the comments above that seeks to generalise attributes across massive social groups. If two 'little old white ladies' go on a shop-lifting spree, or cause a traffic pile-up because of their lack of driving ability - according to the way I read your comments we can then assume that all 'little old white ladies' are thieves and should have their driving licences revoked. To answer your question about the trains: They were blown up by criminals. Religious zealots. You are attempting to smear a broad cross section of the world community - hundreds of millions of people - by implicating them in this act by religious association. But when a Protestant commits an horrendous crime - do you automatically blame all of them? When you accuse me of creating a straw man, you comfortably ignore the fact that you are selectively using news items to reinforce your own innate prejudices on the topics of race and religion. Jack Parkinson From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Wed Nov 9 11:24:00 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 03:24:00 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 26, Issue 10 In-Reply-To: <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/9/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > But when a Protestant commits an horrendous crime - do you automatically > blame all of them? To what extent can Medieval Christianity be blamed for the Crusades? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Wed Nov 9 14:23:29 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 22:23:29 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <000a01c5e539$37c633c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> The story below is for anyone who believes that the French riots are something peculiar to that country. The prediction here for the US and western nations in general is dire. Could be that a similar situation to that in France is not so far away from your local neighborhood... And it won't be 'the Muslims' - because it wasn't 'the Muslims' in France. It WILL be their local equivalent... Whatever underpaid, under-resourced, ghettoised minority is currently do the drudge work in your area for less than a living wage - while living in a hovel. Rather than despising these people and branding them as criminals and crazies when, inevitably, they make their stand - we should tackle these social problems now. Contented citizens with full bellies NEVER man the barricades... Jack Parkinson French Fires By Stephen Pizzo, News for Real Posted on November 9, 2005, http://www.alternet.org/story/27998/ How do you explain the rioting that is happening in France? Two words: cheap labor. France, like most other mature Western economies, has embraced cheap labor from underdeveloped countries. That flood of cheap labor has, at least until now, served both corporations and consumers. Corporate earnings are up across the board, for example. But, you point out, wages are down across the board too. How does that serve consumers -- most of whom are working-class folk? The answer comes as a single, hyphenated word -- Wal-Mart. Cheap labor produces cheap goods. How many times have you bought something at a Big Box store and said to yourself, I don't know how they can make and sell this item so cheaply? Down deep, of course, you really don't care. You're just happy you got the gizmo for so little. And it's not just cheap labor abroad that we're addicted to. In both Europe and the U.S., legal and illegal immigration has turned ordinary Americans into cheap labor employers as well. Even a working-class stiff can afford a gardener, a housekeeper and a nanny these days. You can quite literally pick them up right off the street corner. Want an addition built on to your home? It's almost certain that the only reason you can afford one is because the contractor no longer hires union carpenters. Instead, he picks up a few Mexican carpenters down on a corner, or a hiring hall. They are skilled and hardworking, and they put in a full day for a fraction of what a union carpenter would charge. You're happy. The contractor's happy.But some former union carpenter now works at the local Oil Stop, earning half of what he once made. Then again, that one-time union carpenter is still able to make ends meet, thanks to cheap imported goods -- at least for now. So far, so good for everyone -- at least it would appear. But there is an inevitable price for all this, and the French are paying it now. There really is no free lunch, even in France. Two dynamics are now in play, even if most Western governments still refuse to acknowledge them. First, Western economies have been busy for the past 10 years or so stewing the golden geese that made them economic powerhouses in the first place --- their working middle-classes. Workers' real wages have plummeted as their homegrown industries turned to cheaper foreign labor. In the short run, those cheap goods coming back into their countries blunted the effect of lower domestic wages. But that can't go on forever. Sooner or later, Western consumers will run out of both disposable income and available credit. When that happens, the middle-class consumer -- the engine that drives every Western economy -- will stop pulling the train. (We should see the first hint of that here during the coming holiday season.) Second, low wages paid to immigrants -- many illegal -- create the very conditions that sparked the riots in France. Do the math yourself. If American workers, who have seen their real wages drop like a rock, are beginning to feel the first signs of economic stress, imagine the fiscal conditions that face the average low-wage immigrant family. Such immigrants already live on the economic razor's edge. What they learn -- too late --is that the deck is stacked against them. They cannot join the mainstream of these societies, because allowing them to do so would require paying them a livable wage. And what purpose would that serve, paying immigrants the same as domestic workers? The French, for example, already don't seem to care for having all these folks in their country to begin with. The reason they put up with them is because they work for peanuts. France may be the first Western nation to experience the downside of cheap imported labor, but it will not be the last. Trapped in ghettos by low wages, stuck in low-end jobs by cultural, racial and religious factors, the lid eventually blows -- always. When that happens the citizens and companies that had benefited from their cheap labor first always go into denial. They are shocked, simply shocked! They blame everyone but themselves for the real reasons behind the violence. The rioters are "scum, stirred up by radical clerics. They are not oppressed, they have no genuine issues. They are just criminals." Yes, some of the rioters we are seeing in France are criminals. But France's real problem is that French society has become hooked on a pool of surplus immigrant labor. I said "surplus," because that's key to keeping cheap labor cheap. The trouble is that surplus of labor also means that, at any point in time, there are more unemployed immigrants in France than working ones, with more joining that surplus labor pool each day. Tick, tick, tick. America is lucky in that our flood of immigrants comes largely from Mexico, a generally peaceful country populated by peaceful people. (Have you ever heard of a Mexican suicide bomber?) France's immigrants, by comparison, largely herald from poor Muslim countries, like former French colonies in North Africa -- a part of the world where political/social/religous violence is the norm rather than the exception. But the Americans and the French have their thirst for cheap labor in common. And sooner or later, social unrest will hit here as well. Here, I suspect it will be American workers who got a taste of middle-class life, only to have it snatched away from them. Those once well-paid Americans now find themselves stranded between the rich, who are getting richer, and the working poor, who are getting poorer. The middle ground upon which they once stood has all but disappeared. They may not understand the macro-economic reasons for that, but they know this much -- they no longer have the means of moving up the economic ladder, and they have no intentions of joining the working poor. When that realization sinks in, even dirt-cheap toaster ovens at Wal-Mart won't help. Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including "Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans," which was nominated for a Pulitzer. ? 2005 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 9 17:32:49 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:32:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <000a01c5e539$37c633c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <00ce01c5e553$aba01ad0$a20d4e0c@MyComputer> "Jack Parkinson" > The prediction here for the US and western nations in general is dire. Yawn. I predict that at one time or another there will indeed be riots in the USA, and in every other country in the world. Big deal, riots are a dime a dozen. I am not impressed. > And it won't be 'the Muslims' - because it wasn't > 'the Muslims' in France. Don't be silly, of course it was the Muslims in France. > It WILL be their local equivalent It will be a group that is at the bottom of the economic ladder, obviously. In France it was a group that was crippled by its religion; I do not think it's a coincidence that nearly all of the world's very poorest countries are Muslim despite having more than their far share of natural recourses. > Rather than despising these people I confess I find little in them that is lovable. > and branding them as criminals I thought beating up people, looting shops and burning cars was criminal, but perhaps I am misinformed. > and crazies I humbly submit that fundamentalist Muslims (or Christians) are crazies. > we should tackle these social problems now. By "we" you mean government and by "tackle" you mean the same tired old programs dreamed up by the same tired old politicians that have caused much of the problem in the first place; just do more of the same and everything will be rosy. If government really wants to help it should just get out of the way. > Contented citizens with full bellies NEVER man the barricades. Quite true and rather fortunate, if the richest and most productive and powerful elements in society rioted it would be far more disruptive. > Cheap labor produces cheap goods. A keen grasp of the obvious. > How many times have you bought something at a > Big Box store and said to yourself, I don't know > how they can make and sell this item so cheaply? Never, I just figured its cheap because its made in a third world sweat shop, and that doesn't bother me one tinny tiny bit. Suppose I run such a place making shirts and pay my 1000 workers 7 cents an hour. Am I a villain? I don't think so. My workers are delighted because the alternative to 7 cents an hour is zero cents an hour, I am delighted because I am making a very nice profit, and Wal-Mart customers are delighted because they get a nice shirt at a reasonable price. Or would it be more moral of me to fire 99 workers out of 100 and pay the remaining ones 7$ an hour, or fire 999 workers out of a thousand and pay the single remaining one 70$ an hour? Yes I know, I should pay all 1000 workers 70$ an hour, but I simply wouldn't have the money to do that because nobody would buy my shirts because nobody could afford them. And yes, I do think it's a tragedy that somebody must live on 7 cents a hour, but the root of that tragedy is not some evil Wal-Mart conspiracy, the root cause is that the world does not have enough wealth, and the way to generate that wealth is the free market not grandiose government schemes. Just after WW2 Japan and India were about equally poor, India initiated subsidies and price controls and nationalized companies all in the name of helping the poor; meanwhile Japan embraced capitalism. Today Japan is filthy rich and India still dirt poor. The contrast between North and South Korea is an even more extreme example of this. So forgive me if I don't get outraged when you talk about how Wal-Mart is exploiting workers in poor countries. John K Clark From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 02:17:39 2005 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:17:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] may i post letters here? Message-ID: <20051110021739.29848.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> it would be good protocol for me to ask you guys before posting something. Occasionally i would like to post letters to the editor that you can critique if you wish. What say you? --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 02:59:46 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:59:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation (iaging) In-Reply-To: <20051109055757.12964.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeff Davis wrote: > Which brings me once again to the question: if I > extract some of my bone marrow, sort the various > progenitor cells, repair, rejuvenate, or immortalize > them, culture them to increase their number, and > reinject them into my bone marrow, can I rejuvenate > or > "super-rejuvenate" my bone marrow progenitor cell > repair/mainteneance capability and thereby achieve a > substantial extension of my health and/or lifespan? In answer to your question, yes. Supposing that you could somehow rejuvenate the CD34+ positive stem cells from your bone marrow, you would undoubtably extend your life. Immortalizing them however is a tricky proposition, because cellular immortalization without tight regulation of growth is called cancer. So from a systems point of view, rejuvenating your bone marrow and thymus would add many years to your life. The whole trick is figuring out HOW to do it without causing leukemia. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Thu Nov 10 03:21:06 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:21:06 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France Message-ID: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: "John K Clark" said: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France >Yawn. I predict that at one time or another there will indeed be riots in >the USA, and in every other country in the world. Big deal, riots are a >dime >a dozen. I am not impressed. Presumably, you will be impressed when this directly degrades the quality of yours and your families lives... Meantime - enjoy that complacency! >... I do not think >it's a coincidence that nearly all of the world's very poorest countries >are >Muslim despite having more than their far share of natural recourses. Some of the richest countries are also Muslim. And some of the world's most populous. >I humbly submit that fundamentalist Muslims (or Christians) are crazies. Glad we have one point of agreement - but we can't fight their ignorance with our ignorance. Contented citizens with full bellies NEVER man the barricades. >Quite true and rather fortunate, if the richest and most productive and >powerful elements in society rioted it would be far more disruptive. And far more crazy... Poverty is the root cause of discontent. > How many times have you bought something at a > Big Box store and said to yourself, I don't know > how they can make and sell this item so cheaply? >Never, I just figured its cheap because its made in a third world sweat >shop, and that doesn't bother me one tinny tiny bit. Suppose I run such a >place making shirts and pay my 1000 workers 7 cents an hour. Am I a >villain? I don't think so. My workers are delighted because the alternative >to 7 cents an hour is zero cents an hour, I am delighted because I am >making >a very nice profit, and Wal-Mart customers are delighted because they get a >nice shirt at a reasonable price. Spoilt rich kids always praise their own benevolence when they hand out their loose change. The hot news is: No one is ever delighted at earning 7 cents an hour. They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of the golf club and an SUV. When they see someone like you buying and enjoying these little luxuries with the money they have earned you - they start thinking about torching cars and burning shops... >Or would it be more moral of me to fire 99 workers out of 100 and pay the >remaining ones 7$ an hour, Yes... >And yes, I do think it's a tragedy that somebody must live on 7 cents a >hour, but the root of that tragedy is not some evil Wal-Mart conspiracy, >the >root cause is that the world does not have enough wealth There is plenty of wealth in the world. Basic needs for everyone could be met with a level of expenditure that is so low, it is unlikely to be noticed. Most international relief agencies estimate 25 billion US dollars as a enough to provide everyone with food, clean water and basic health care - right now. This sum is peanuts in the overall scheme of things - and would probably take off a lot of pressure from the western nations in the form of less illegal immigration, less hostility, less resentment, and less tendency to stir up militant action/terrorism. If you know that desperate people strap explosives to their bodies and blow up trains - best make sure they are not desperate in the first place. >and the way to generate that wealth is the free market not grandiose >government schemes. IF we had a real free market maybe. I don't think this free market creature does exists and even doubt that it really can exist... Current 'free markets' are simply manipulated, tightly controlled strategies to put the power and profits into corporate HQ's in the US and Europe. >Just after WW2 Japan and India were about equally poor, India initiated >subsidies and price controls and nationalized companies all in the name of >helping the poor; meanwhile Japan embraced capitalism. Today Japan is >filthy >rich and India still dirt poor. A bit simplistic to say the least. Japan is in deep economic trouble now despite being at the economic forefront a generation ago. India is riding an economic boom which is seeing a burgeoning, affluent middle class and a sophisticated, well-trained, and increasingly high-tech work-force. China is likely to take the top spot as world number 1 economy within the next ten years - India will not be far behind. Between them, these two countries will have about 35-40% of the worlds population, and can dominate world trade. These are the next two super-powers... >So forgive me if I don't get outraged when you talk about how Wal-Mart is >exploiting workers in >poor countries. John K Clark Yes, I'll forgive you John. But not everyone is such a nice guy... Jack Parkinson From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 10 03:43:31 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 21:43:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051109212759.01d15eb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:21 AM 11/10/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: >Spoilt rich kids always praise their own benevolence when they hand out >their loose change. The hot news is: No one is ever delighted at earning 7 >cents an hour. They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of >the golf club and an SUV. When they see someone like you buying and >enjoying these little luxuries with the money they have earned you - they >start thinking about torching cars and burning shops... Jack, the odd thing is that probably every Aussie on this list shares your basic perspective, while it remains bizarre and wrong-headed to most of the US extropes. Hard to say why that is; we are not *utterly* slaves of our nations' economics dogmas. On the other hand, you're overstating your case just a tad. Rioters in France aren't living on 7 cents an hour, and I doubt many of them are earning the bourgeoisie their SUVs--it's exactly because there's no obvious route to decent work that they go crazy with rage. Their parents, generally, were imported as a dirt cheap labor pool--as many Europeans were to Oz in the 50s--and technological/ educational shifts, plus pervasive and fearful disdain from the haves, leave their kids with few prospects, even as they watch endless TV shows, movies and games that goad them with visions of wealth, ease, fun, and mayhem. My wife Barbara tells me DeSoto and Thomas Sowell have much to say on the cultural backgrounds to these topics, but the problems seem to me almost intractable by now. Maybe dead-cheap molecular manufacture will end such strife, but I stand by my gloomy prediction in THE SPIKE a decade or so back that what we'll see is a planet of Color Gang Wars and the like among those for whom life retains no discipline or meaning outside of arbitrary local status and violence. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 03:43:50 2005 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 19:43:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <20051110034351.92558.qmail@web51614.mail.yahoo.com> But you must know by now how slowly we are evolving; riots will likely be sporadic 50 years from now. After that who knows, however radicals don't appear to grasp the constancy of thinking, such as how so many elderly are obsessed with what it was it was like in 1949 or whenever. Too many muslims want to return to the glory days of 1913 before the Ottomans got into WWI and went out of business. Muslim thinking is too deeply wired into Islamics' minds to even begin to think it will change soon. There is plenty of wealth in the world. Basic needs for everyone could be met with a level of expenditure that is so low, it is unlikely to be noticed. Most international relief agencies estimate 25 billion US dollars as a enough to provide everyone with food, clean water and basic health care - right now. This sum is peanuts in the overall scheme of things - and would probably take off a lot of pressure from the western nations in the form of less illegal immigration, less hostility, less resentment, and less tendency to stir up militant action/terrorism. If you know that desperate people strap explosives to their bodies and blow up trains - best make sure they are not desperate in the first place. --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 03:53:44 2005 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 19:53:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <20051110034351.92558.qmail@web51614.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20051110035344.52471.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Most of all radicals overemphasize the economic aspect. You forget how much Muslims want meaning even though we here know there is no meaning. All the economic growth in the world isn't going to give Muslims meaning in life, just at most some sort of purpose-- which isn't enough, at least for Muslims. Muslim beliefs are less superficial than we want to know, the beliefs are imbedded in their minds. Al Brooks wrote: But you must know by now how slowly we are evolving; riots will likely be sporadic 50 years from now. After that who knows, however radicals don't appear to grasp the constancy of thinking, such as how so many elderly are obsessed with what it was it was like in 1949 or whenever. Too many muslims want to return to the glory days of 1913 before the Ottomans got into WWI and went out of business. Muslim thinking is too deeply wired into Islamics' minds to even begin to think it will change soon. There is plenty of wealth in the world. Basic needs for everyone could be met with a level of expenditure that is so low, it is unlikely to be noticed. Most international relief agencies estimate 25 billion US dollars as a enough to provide everyone with food, clean water and basic health care - right now. This sum is peanuts in the overall scheme of things - and would probably take off a lot of pressure from the western nations in the form of less illegal immigration, less hostility, less resentment, and less tendency to stir up militant action/terrorism. If you know that desperate people strap explosives to their bodies and blow up trains - best make sure they are not desperate in the first place. --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Thu Nov 10 05:44:35 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:44:35 +1100 Subject: Molecular manfacturing Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051109212759.01d15eb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00bd01c5e5b9$d519b770$8998e03c@homepc> Damien Broderick wrote: > Maybe dead-cheap molecular manufacture will end such strife, > but I stand by my gloomy prediction in THE SPIKE a decade or > so back that what we'll see is a planet of Color Gang Wars and > the like among those for whom life retains no discipline or meaning > outside of arbitrary local status and violence. I think that if it were considered to be an imminently realizable threat (or promise), dead-cheap molecular manufacture for the masses would be opposed by empowered minorities as though their existing privileges, their future economic aspirations and even their lives depended on it. The first thought of empowered minorities would probably be how could they own and control this imminent efficient means of manufacturing exclusively; the second thought when they recognized that they could not, would be that it would be better to ban it completely so as to ensure that none of their competitors or enemies would end up with it either. Dead cheap molecular manufacturing would not only change the basis of all existing economies (and so threaten the established interests of the powerful and existing social order) but would also enable dead cheap manufacturing of weapons (which would scare the proverbial shit out of the established interests of the currently powerful). Unfortunately (I should say in my opinion here I guess) molecular manufacturing is a *double* pipe dream. If it were technologically possible it would be politically impossible. Contemporary humans would "Fermi paradox" themselves. Most contemporary humans (Muslims and Christians) still purport to believe and act as though this life is some sort of rehearsal for a supernatural next one. Whilst that is so, molecular nanotech would be directed towards weapons construction. Brett Paatsch From moulton at moulton.com Thu Nov 10 06:53:32 2005 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 22:53:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <20051110035344.52471.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051110035344.52471.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1131605613.12021.339.camel@localhost.localdomain> I think we should avoid focusing on this as just a "Muslim" issue. From the news reports I have seen it is more complex. One feature to consider is the differences in government policy in housing, work regulations and taxation. In the Tuesday Nov 8 Wall Street Journal there is an opinion piece by Joel Kotkin titled "Our Immigrants, Their Immigrants" in which Kotkin discusses issues such as possible discrimination, unemployment and government social policy and how French government policies have contributed to their problems. In contrast Kotkin describes the more open free-market, lower tax, lower regulation that is found in many parts of the US where immigrants are a vibrant part of the social and economic life of the area. On a related note, in the Wall Street Journal Wednesday Nov 9 there is an interesting article about the effect of real estate ownership on poor people. The article describes an area (a former dump) in Buenos Aires Argentina which was taken over by poor people (about 1800 families) in 1981. Through a variety of circumstances about half of them got title to their lots (typically 30 ft by 100 ft). All of the families started with similar jobs, education, etc. Now the families with title have improved their homes, have children who are better educated, have a more positive outlook on live, etc. Just as Hernando de Soto has said and if you have not read any of the works by Hernando de Soto I recommend that you do. Fred From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 07:15:54 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 23:15:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Molecular manfacturing Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <00bd01c5e5b9$d519b770$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051110071554.1842.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > I think that if it were considered to be an > imminently realizable > threat (or promise), dead-cheap molecular > manufacture for the > masses would be opposed by empowered minorities as > though > their existing privileges, their future economic > aspirations and > even their lives depended on it. I think history and contemporary third world culture definitely corraborates your assessment. There are in nearly all cultures past and present, those who would cling so tenaciously to power (even of the most mediocre sort) through undermining the power of their neighbors. Thus they view political power as minimazation of every one elses utility function rather than maximumization of their own. Thus instead of trying to increase their power by increasing the overall GDP of their own countries, for example, many dictators are satisfied with simply denying their charges of basic necessities. Take for an example off of the top of my head, North Korea. Kim Il Jong sits upon a motherlode of mineral wealth yet he would rather let it lie unutilized in the earth whilst his subjects starve rather than develope it and risk having to share power. > The first thought of empowered minorities would > probably be > how could they own and control this imminent > efficient means > of manufacturing exclusively; the second thought > when they > recognized that they could not, would be that it > would be > better to ban it completely so as to ensure that > none of their > competitors or enemies would end up with it either. In the land of the blind there is much eye gouging by the one-eyed king. > > Unfortunately (I should say in my opinion here I > guess) molecular > manufacturing is a *double* pipe dream. > If it were technologically possible it would be > politically > impossible. Contemporary humans would "Fermi > paradox" > themselves. Most contemporary humans (Muslims and > Christians) > still purport to believe and act as though this life > is some sort of > rehearsal for a supernatural next one. Whilst that > is so, > molecular nanotech would be directed towards weapons > construction. So very tragic it is that these people believe they are rehearsing, not realizing that they are playing improv to a packed house for a limited engagement. Perhaps someday, we may be able to oblige these people out of pity, by programming virtual heaven, hell, and paradise and uploading them into their appropriate after-life based on the reviews they recieve from their critics in the audience. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 10 07:29:02 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 08:29:02 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France Message-ID: Fred Moulton >I think we should avoid focusing on this as just a "Muslim" issue. From >the news reports I have seen it is more complex. One feature to >consider is the differences in government policy in housing, work >regulations and taxation. I agree, I think it's missing most of the picture to see the focus on "Muslim". In addition to my previous post on immigration in France ( http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2005-November/021679.html ), I dug up this next article about the French citizenship requirements. It looks not too different from Swiss citizenship requirements, which in my view are excessively rigid. In both of these countries, being born in that country does not automatically give citizenship. Here's a site I found that says more: (corrected a few of their typos and the writer does not have a fluent grasp of English, unfortunately) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- French citizenship Requirements http://www.euskosare.org/euskal_herria/euskal_herrian_bizi/french_nationality Conditions to obtain the nationality : By filiation * French is the son, legitimate or illegitimate with, at least, one of its parents being of french nationality. * The filiation of the child has no effect on its nationality if it is not established while being a minor. * The sole fact of being born in france does not confer nationality, except for the children of unknown parents or stateless. * The son born in france before january 1994 with at least one parent born in the ancient overseas french territory (before its independency) is also considered a french citizen. By reason of birth and residence in france As from september 1st. 1998, every child of foreign parents born in france acquires french nationality at his majority if he is living in France and if he has lived in france, in a continuous or discontinuous way al least five years (starting at the age of 11 years). Under certain circumstances, nationality can be acquired beforehand starting a from sixteen years. French nationality can also be demanded under certain circumstances by the name of the minor as from the age of thirteen years, always under his personal consent. This situation affects the children of foreigners born in france which, starting with the application of said law (september 1st., 1998) have three possibilities: 1. If they desire only to maintain the foreign nationality, they can renounce to the french nationality before the competent french authorities during the six precedent months or during the twelve months that follow their majority. 2. If they desire to maintain the foreign nationality and acquire the french nationality it is advisable to request for this last before their majority of age. 3. In case the interested party that fulfills the requirements of the first paragraph does not carry out any of the beforementioned proceedings french law will automatically grant them this nationality at their majority of age. By marriage to a french citizen French nationality can be agreed by declaration before the instance judge or the french consul (if the interested party lives abroad) to each foreigner or stateless which marries a person of french nationality. This benefit can be solicited a year after the marriage was celebrated, and under the condition that the couple keeps living together and the french consort has not lost that nationality. By naturalization The requests for naturalization of residents in france are competence of public organizations at the place of origin for the constitution of the file, and at the ministry of employment for final decision. Foreigners can be naturalized if they can prove residence in France during the five preceding years of the request. A person which does not reside in France at the moment of the firm of the decree cannot be naturalized. For residence it is understood a fixed residence that present a stable and permanent character, coincident with the centre of material interests and family bonds . Children of those people who acquire french nationality become french with full rights if they have the same residence as their parents. Necessary documentation for the obtention of double nationality * Integral copy of marriage certificate or of its transcription (for marriages celebrated out of France a duly translated and legalized certificate has to be presented). * Copy of berth certificate of the french consort. * Copy of birth certificate of the foreign consort accompanied of traduction effected by a public judged translator. * Evidence of french nationality of the french consort : the birth certificate is sufficient for the persons born in france with at least one of his parents also born in France. In other cases, the documents demanded depend on the origin of french nationality of the interested party , naturalization decree, collective effect , etc. A french nationality certificate could occasionally be demanded when the verification of the french nationality should be difficult. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The next is a good set of citizen references for many countries (but not for France) if you are curious. I think that citizenship and immigration laws are an important factor in guessing the 'dissatisfaction' of foreign people living there. Internet Law Library: Immigration, Nationality and citizenship law http://www.lawguru.com/ilawlib/104.htm -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow From dmasten at piratelabs.org Thu Nov 10 07:39:54 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:39:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <1131608394.3591.24.camel@dmlap> On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 11:21 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: > >Or would it be more moral of me to fire 99 workers out of 100 and pay the > >remaining ones 7$ an hour, > > Yes... But this is part of the reason for the riots. French laws ensure excellent working conditions for those who have jobs, but as a consequence they have high unemployment with the unemployed having little to no hope of gaining employment. It is the unemployed who are rioting. How is this more moral? From megao at sasktel.net Thu Nov 10 07:50:38 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:50:38 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> But that's the challenge, to switch every body cell on as a totipotent cancer cell similtaneously, slow down the metabolism so none divides, circulate a swarm of autoimmune cells to tag defective cells for future destruction, reset all the switches , crank up the metabolism and send in the scavenger cells to wack out the burned out cells and infuse a new batch of stem cells into every tissue to rebuild tissues. A massive order, but like with "Doctor Who" it is steady state-evolution which will replace natural selection by death or illness. The trick is to maintain the memory and consciousness of the brain through this housecleaning operation. The Avantguardian wrote: >--- Jeff Davis wrote: > > >>Which brings me once again to the question: if I >>extract some of my bone marrow, sort the various >>progenitor cells, repair, rejuvenate, or immortalize >>them, culture them to increase their number, and >>reinject them into my bone marrow, can I rejuvenate >>or >>"super-rejuvenate" my bone marrow progenitor cell >>repair/mainteneance capability and thereby achieve a >>substantial extension of my health and/or lifespan? >> >> > >In answer to your question, yes. Supposing that you >could somehow rejuvenate the CD34+ positive stem cells >from your bone marrow, you would undoubtably extend >your life. Immortalizing them however is a tricky >proposition, because cellular immortalization without >tight regulation of growth is called cancer. So from a >systems point of view, rejuvenating your bone marrow >and thymus would add many years to your life. The >whole trick is figuring out HOW to do it without >causing leukemia. > >The Avantguardian >is >Stuart LaForge >alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 10 09:03:27 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:03:27 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <000a01c5e539$37c633c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <000a01c5e539$37c633c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/9/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > The story below is for anyone who believes that the French riots are > something peculiar to that country. The prediction here for the US and > western nations in general is dire. Could be that a similar situation to > that in France is not so far away from your local neighborhood... > And it won't be 'the Muslims' - because it wasn't 'the Muslims' in France. > > It WILL be their local equivalent... Whatever underpaid, under-resourced, > ghettoised minority is currently do the drudge work in your area for less > than a living wage - while living in a hovel. True to a large extent. The problem is exacerbated when that minority has a coherent religious ideology that is inimical to the society they are living in. And as an aside, we should stop importing cheap labour. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 10 09:09:13 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:09:13 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 26, Issue 10 In-Reply-To: References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/9/05, Neil H. wrote: > > On 11/9/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > > > > > But when a Protestant commits an horrendous crime - do you automatically > > blame all of them? > > > > To what extent can Medieval Christianity be blamed for the Crusades? > Quite a lot IMO. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Thu Nov 10 09:47:58 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:47:58 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> From: Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO To: ExI chat list Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 6:50 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation But that's the challenge, to switch every body cell on as a totipotent cancer cell similtaneously, slow down the metabolism so none divides, circulate a swarm of autoimmune cells to tag defective cells for future destruction, reset all the switches , crank up the metabolism and send in the scavenger cells to wack out the burned out cells and infuse a new batch of stem cells into every tissue to rebuild tissues. A massive order, but like with "Doctor Who" it is steady state-evolution which will replace natural selection by death or illness. The trick is to maintain the memory and consciousness of the brain through this housecleaning operation. "Every body cell" would give you a base set of around 100 trillion cells. Lets say you wanted to switch every body cell to a cancer cell (I don't think that even makes sense - but lets say), how would you do it? With what hormone or molecule? Or are you thinking nanobots? How would you slow down metabolism so no cells divide? Metabolism works in such a way that when cells stop getting fed (glucose levels in blood are low) some cells (in the liver say) go into glucose or ketone bodies from fat production specifically to fed other cells (like brain cells) so that they wont die when there is no dietary glucose available. Or by slowing down metabolism did you mean cryonics? Where do your autoimmune cells that are to do the tagging to come from themselves (you stopped cell division -somehow- remember)? What cell markers are they to zero in on? If you've made *every* cell cancerous how many macrophage/eater cells are you going to have to have ? How do you imagine they'll fit geometrically in the body made of other cells? Are your scavenger cells "carrying" the new batch of stem cells? How are they getting through the blood brain barrier? I am not even slightly an expert in this area but I think I know enough to recognize that what you have said above doesn't make any biological sense. I mean no offense but it seems like you might be repeating something that you have heard someone else say which didn't make sense but which you didn't understand well enough to realise that it didn't make sense. Brett Paatsch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alito at organicrobot.com Thu Nov 10 10:13:21 2005 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:13:21 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051109212759.01d15eb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <000901c5e5a5$d1075390$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051109212759.01d15eb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1131617602.11483.120.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 21:43 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > Jack, the odd thing is that probably every Aussie on this list shares your > basic perspective, To try to throw some cold water on the nationalistic perspective, I don't (legally Aussie, and even though I wasn't born here, I have by now lived here for most of my life). alejandro From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Thu Nov 10 11:42:03 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:42:03 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> ----- Original Message ----- From: Dirk Bruere To: Jack Parkinson Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:11 PM On 11/9/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: Dirk wrote: >>So, who blew up the trains? >>Was it little old white ladies? >>However, I think I can stand behind the statement that 'not a single Black >>citizen bombed the trains in London'. >>>Any statement that begins: 'All Moslems/blacks/Irish/Poles... (insert >>> favorite despised minority here) is just a confession of personal >>> prejudice, bigotry and ignorance... >>Well, death to your straw man - because I didn't say 'all'. Dirk >>No, you didn't - but if you meant your comments to be restricted to the >>actual perpetrators rather than the groups they (putatively) represent - >>then you phrased your critique pretty badly. >The average Moslem is as much to blame for what's happening as the average >Communist was to >blame for the excesses of Communism. Or the average >Fascist to blame for the excesses of >Fascism. >How's that? Dirk Yes. That sounds good. Since the average communist/fascist was not at all to blame for the excesses of those regimes. And I would bet that the average Moslem around the world also knows nothing about the riots in France - or even that Moslems live in France in any significant numbers... Average people are rarely to blame anywhere for anything in fact - except in sometimes being too passive. In the (admittedly disputed) maxim attributed to Edmund Burke: 'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing'. All excess is by definition an aberration from the average. All radical polarization of thought, opinion and practice is also NOT average by definition. Terrorism, violence, murder etc are also NOT average - these are extremes of the human experience. Average people are ok. They are good citizens. They educate their kids, mostly uphold the law, and mostly pay their taxes. But God help any government that thinks it can get away with nominating a section of the community as the permanent sub-average the rest of society can exploit. Sooner or later they will bite the hand that claims to be feeding them. That 'hand,'- is all those people who say that poverty wages are better than no wages, a leaky roof is better than no roof, no proper medical treatment is still better than being dead. In France it is the second-class pseudo-citizenship of the North African 'inexpulsables.' Those who cannot be legally expelled or deported - but who are definitely unwanted - except as a source of cheap labor. Denying these people equality of education, social status and job opportunity is just lighting the fuse - trouble must come as sure as night follows day.. Jack Parkinson From mail at harveynewstrom.com Thu Nov 10 16:43:01 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (mail at harveynewstrom.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:43:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> Message-ID: Jeff Davis wrote: > Which brings me once again to the question: > if I[...]rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow, > can I rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow[...]? This is a circular, tautological question that assumes its own answer before it is asked. If we assume that we can tweak bone marrow to extend lifespan, would this allow us to tweak bone marrow to extend lifespan? This question and answer discussion has nil information content. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From megao at sasktel.net Thu Nov 10 17:36:32 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:36:32 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <43738520.9000809@sasktel.net> Actually I have been thinking about this for many years (over 2 decades) and what has to be done is to put the body into near hibernation state and slow metabolism to a crawl. The introduced cells have to be able to function at a high rate even under these conditions and perhaps even have a metabolism that either stops or self-destructs at normal body temperatures and metabolism as a failsafe. The body metabolism over perhaps a month might be equivalent to an hour while the introduced cells are working at breakneck speed and may be able do a years work over that month. These cells would have to metabolize energy sources that the body would otherwise consider inert. The introduced cells should have to be able to carry away, or metabolize dangerous waste biological products of the hibernating body as well. Just think about the creation of several separate secondary "programmable" armies of specialized minicells. We use the term nanobot without the slightest clue as to what they might be or how they would operate so this is quite in line with that concept. What we might have to do is provide them with an environment where they can work efficiently and with undue interference from normal body processes. Indeed it might take interaction with a number of supervisory systems ranging from MRI type scanners , and AI complexity oversight to move this process from start to finish without killing the customer. A new stem cell population would need to be grown beforehand, perhaps in a controlled way sequestered in the body much like an encapsulated tumor or embryo and harvested prior to the regerarative procedure. And the leuekemia analogy is a good one, perhaps we shall find deliberate creation of a cancerous stem cell population the best way to create a large population of embyonic case type cells to infuse back. Remember, cancer cells can slither around and take root in all manner of places in the body quite efficiently. The trick is to be able to turn on and off this mechanism on demand. I think that with the convergence of technologies at a singularity level with AI level computational capacity there is hope to create this level of sophistication in the mangement of biological systems. I did not say that this would be easy. Just remember that what we consider normal in terms of computer chips and their functions would have been considered magic or witchcraft and idle fantasy as little as 100 years ago. Morris. Brett Paatsch wrote: > From: Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 6:50 PM > Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation > > But that's the challenge, to switch every body cell on as a > totipotent cancer cell similtaneously, slow down the metabolism so > none divides, circulate a swarm of autoimmune cells to tag > defective cells for future destruction, reset all the switches > , crank up the metabolism and send in the scavenger cells to wack > out the burned out cells and infuse a new batch of stem cells > into every tissue to rebuild tissues. A massive order, but like > with "Doctor Who" it is steady state-evolution which will replace > natural selection by death or illness. The trick is to maintain > the memory and consciousness of the brain through this > housecleaning operation. > > "Every body cell" would give you a base set of around 100 trillion cells. > > Lets say you wanted to switch every body cell to a cancer cell (I > don't think > that even makes sense - but lets say), how would you do it? With what > hormone or molecule? Or are you thinking nanobots? > > How would you slow down metabolism so no cells divide? Metabolism > works in such a way that when cells stop getting fed (glucose levels in > blood are low) some cells (in the liver say) go into glucose or ketone > bodies from fat production specifically to fed other cells (like brain > cells) > so that they wont die when there is no dietary glucose available. > Or by slowing down metabolism did you mean cryonics? > > Where do your autoimmune cells that are to do the tagging to come > from themselves (you stopped cell division -somehow- remember)? What > cell markers are they to zero in on? If you've made *every* cell > cancerous > how many macrophage/eater cells are you going to have to have ? How do > you imagine they'll fit geometrically in the body made of other cells? > > Are your scavenger cells "carrying" the new batch of stem cells? How > are they getting through the blood brain barrier? > > I am not even slightly an expert in this area but I think I know enough > to recognize that what you have said above doesn't make any biological > sense. > > I mean no offense but it seems like you might be repeating something > that you have heard someone else say which didn't make sense but > which you didn't understand well enough to realise that it didn't make > sense. > > Brett Paatsch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megao at sasktel.net Thu Nov 10 17:39:45 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:39:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <437385E1.2060303@sasktel.net> Re-the brain: The blood brain barrier is a neat way to segregate the access of this process into 2 categories, body tissue regeneration and brain tissue management. We certainly do not want to be smashing and bashing about in the brain the same way as in the rest of the body. Biology has laid out these systems really neat this way. From mail at harveynewstrom.com Thu Nov 10 17:47:59 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (mail at harveynewstrom.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:47:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <43738520.9000809@sasktel.net> References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> <43738520.9000809@sasktel.net> Message-ID: Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO writes: > Actually I have been thinking about this for many years (over 2 decades) > and what has to be done is to put the body into > near hibernation state and slow metabolism to a crawl. Is there any evidence that animals that hibernate live longer than animals that don't? Or that preventing an animal from hibernating shortens its lifespan? I am not sure that the assumption that hibernation slows down aging is necessarily true. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 10 17:45:56 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:45:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> "Jack Parkinson" > Presumably, you will be impressed when this (silly riots in France) > directly degrades the quality of yours and your families lives Anything that directly degrades the quality of my life or that of my family impresses me; but a bunch of ignorant kids in France pretending to be American gangster rappors is unlikely to do that. > Some of the richest countries are also Muslim. A few Muslim countries through a lucky geological break happen to be sitting on top of a lake that contains 2/3 of the world's oil and so are rich, but that hasn't stopped Nigeria, a Muslim country with lots of oil, from being the second poorest country on Earth, beaten only by Mozambique, another Muslim country. Continuing on our list of the poorest countries in the world we have Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, The Congo, Bangladesh, Angola and Afghanistan, all are predominantly Muslim countries. Let's look at a subset of the Muslim world, the Arabs. There are over 250 million Arabs and they have most of the world's oil, but nevertheless the GNP of the entire Arab world is less than that of Spain, a country with no oil and a population of only 40 million. One reason for this may be that the number of books translated into Arabic over the past thousand years is about the same as the number of books translated into Spanish just last year. > Poverty is the root cause of discontent. No, if everybody is poor you're not angry, just sad. Envy is the root cause of discontent. > Spoilt rich kids always praise their own benevolence I may be spoilt but I make no claims of benevolence, I make no claim that I earned the right to be born in a western non Muslim culture, I was just lucky. > No one is ever delighted at earning 7 > cents an hour. Quite untrue. If everyone you knew was making zero cents an hour and was 24 hours away from starvation and you were making 7 cents an hour and was a full 48 hours away from starvation you would feel like Rockefeller. >They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of the > golf club and an SUV. The people of South Korea have all that now, but 50 years ago they were on that infamous list of the poorest countries on the planet. Things changed when the Korean's complained about the injustice of it all so the rich countries piled gold onto huge cargo ships and sent it to Korea until everybody was equal. No wait, I misspoke that's not how it happened, now I remember: The Korean workers said they'd rather not work for 7 cents an hour and would prefer 70 dollars an hour and their employers said sure no problem. Or maybe it was because the Korean people valued education in things other than in a book of superstitions written 1500 yeas ago, and they had a very strong work ethic, and they embraced capitalism with a vengeance. Maybe that's why South Koreans were issued 15,000 patents over the last 20 years while the entire Arab world had fewer than 400. The contrast between North and South Korea is also interesting, both started with the same culture and the same language, but one had a tightly controlled economy "to help the common people" and one did not. Look at them now! Me: >> would it be more moral of me to fire 99 workers out of 100 and pay the >> remaining ones 7$ an hour You: > Yes. Your position is indefensible morally and economically. Moral nonsense: For every person I can hire there are a thousand lined up outside the gates of my factory begging for chance to make the huge sum of 7 cents an hour; and you, allegedly an advocate of more equality, advise me to make things even more unequal by firing 99 out of 100 of my employs and give the fortunate survivor the ridiculous salary of 7 dollars and hour. Economic nonsense: Now that I have taken your advice my expenses are the same as before but my output is only 1% of what is was, so I must charge 100 times more than what I did before for my product, but at that price nobody at Wal-Mart will buy it. Thus whatever my intentions I no longer have the money to pay my single remaining employee 7 dollars an hour, or even 7 cents an hour, he now makes zero cents an hour and I'm dead broke too. And this is the way to cure world poverty? > There is plenty of wealth in the world. Baloney. There is no way the wealth of the world could be divided up among 7 billion people so everyone has a decent lifestyle, and you and I, the pampered product of rich western culture, would be among those howling in pain the loudest. However this need not always be true because Extropians do not think the economy is a zero sum game, in fact it's about as far from a zero sum game as you can get. > I don't think this free market creature does exists and even doubt > that it really can exist. Any particular reason? > Current 'free markets' are simply manipulated, tightly controlled > strategies Yes, most markets are controlled by governments much more than is rational, without that interference there would be far fewer poor people, perhaps none at all. The freest of all free markets is the black market and that's why it thrives. > to put the power and profits into corporate HQ's in the US and Europe. You almost make that sound like a bad thing. > Japan is in deep economic trouble now Trouble is a relative term. Japan is in economic trouble compared to the USA perhaps, but compared with any Muslim country it most certainly is not, it is in hog heaven because despite its difficulties Japan still has the second largest economy in the world. > India is riding an economic boom Yes, India has improved in the last few years after it started to back away a bit from decades of socialistic laws, regulations, and other brakes on its economy. > China is likely to take the top spot as world number 1 economy within the > next ten years Perhaps, but I don't see the point you're trying to make, it certainly can't be that capitalism is a bad way to make the economy grow and the population of a country rich. John K Clark From megao at sasktel.net Thu Nov 10 18:30:47 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:30:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> <4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net> <013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc> <43738520.9000809@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <437391D7.4050708@sasktel.net> What I mean is that during the process of regeneration and all its assorted processes that the body be rendered as dormant as possible to allow better control of the processes involved in the housekeeping. Once the entire procedure is complete, the body would be brought back to an average normal metabolic rate and like running a car through a drive through car wash out she goes and like Macdonalds or Walmart or Carl Sagan would say "billions and billions- of happy customers served" Instead of pension funds and life insurance funds the medical regeneration lifespan augmentation funds would have to accrue for decades to fund each person's session. This would create income related disparities as billionaires could routinely jump the que for R&R while the average person would get the basic 50 year tune-up. Disease and accident would tend to claim more low income people between R&R than those wealthy enough to go for regenerative treatment on demand. As well steady-state evolution might progress many times faster for the wealthy. The other side is that if a critical error is introduced into the gene pool that only a few leading edge subjects would succumb to it before it is detected and dealt with. This is then an opportunity by changing the stem cell population that will be re-intoduced to do a gradual steady-state evolution. Perhaps this process is undertaken initially every 50 years (because the resources to handle a large population simply would make the que that long) and over time perhaps make it every 10 years. Instead of pension funds and life insurance funds the medical regeneration lifespan augmentation funds would have to accrue for decades to fund each person's session. This would create income related disparities as billionaires could routinely jump the que for R&R while the average person would get the basic 50 year tune-up. Disease and accident would tend to claim more low income people between R&R than those wealthy enough to go for regenerative treatment on demand. As well steady-state evolution might progress many times faster for the wealthy. The other side is that if a critical error is introduced into the gene pool that only a few leading edge subjects would succumb to it before it is detected and dealt with. There is value to having a "wild state" gene pool to draw from in case of catastophic error in the programmable evolutionary state population. Luddites in this case will find themselves a niche too. mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO writes: > >> Actually I have been thinking about this for many years (over 2 >> decades) and what has to be done is to put the body into >> near hibernation state and slow metabolism to a crawl. > > > Is there any evidence that animals that hibernate live longer than > animals that don't? Or that preventing an animal from hibernating > shortens its lifespan? I am not sure that the assumption that > hibernation slows down aging is necessarily true. > -- From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 10 18:27:42 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:27:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051110122206.01cb3278@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:45 PM 11/10/2005 -0500, John K Clark wrote: >>They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of the >>golf club and an SUV. > >The people of South Korea have all that now, but 50 years ago they were on >that infamous list of the poorest countries on the planet. Things changed >when the Korean's complained about the injustice of it all so the rich >countries piled gold onto huge cargo ships and sent it to Korea until >everybody was equal. No wait, I misspoke that's not how it happened Actually it sort of is. I thought for a giddy moment you were referring to, for example, the long history of pumping aid money into SK, such as this from 1997: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/12/24/korea.aid/ < U.S. Prepares Korea Aid Package By John King/CNN WASHINGTON (Dec. 24) -- Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin announced today that a $1.7 billion loan will be made available to South Korea in January, to help the Seoul government bolster confidence in its financial markets. The loan is part of a hastily arranged international effort to accelerate assistance to South Korea... The commitment by the U.S. and other G-7 nations is in conjunction with an International Monetary Fund decision to also speed up loans to South Korea. The centerpiece of the bailout package is a total of $57 billion in loans, most of them from the IMF and the World Bank. South Korea has received $14 billion so far and today's announcement means another $10 billion in loans will be made available by early January. As part of the bailout package, the United States pledged to make $5 billion in loans available as a "second line of defense" in case IMF and other international assistance was not enough to stabilize South Korean markets. Until now, the administration had resisted South Korea's calls for some of that money to be made available immediately. But the White House says it is now clear a more aggressive international response is necessary. > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 19:47:14 2005 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:47:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] even if Arab poverty were terminated Message-ID: <20051110194714.93152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> If poverty were to be terminated in Arab nations, Arabs would still go to war. The koran was written in the 7th century, so for over 1,300 years Arabs have beem reading advice such as to lie in wait for infidels & jews to ambush them at every opportunity. To attack the enemies of Islam is an unambiguous part of the radical Arab heritage, and though radical Arab nationalists constitute only a small fraction of Arabs, sympathy for radicals is not inconsiderable. Of course ending poverty wouldn't hurt at all, but you can see in Western nations that fundamentalist xians and orthodox jews becoming wealthy does not substantially alter their extreme religious views. --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 22:04:25 2005 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 14:04:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051110220425.90115.qmail@web51613.mail.yahoo.com> This is the point that needs to be made. But don't forget that militants want meaning as well as revenge. Their dumb religion gives them some sort of meaning, as it gave their ancestors the same for 1,300 years. Look at America, it has what it takes to end poverty however there exists so too much bitterness and dysfunctionality. Many in America still fume about the Civil War which ended 140 years ago. As Sakharov said, alienation & criminality are the problem everywhere, if every American were wealthy families would still break up or be dysfunctional because all the wealth in the world can't magically glue back together a broken family wherein the parents despise each other. We don't like to accept irreconcilable differences-- but we have to. Now it wont harm anything to end poverty in the Arab world, but it wont make them ecumenical peaceniks filled with the desire to build an extropian world. >No, if everybody is poor you're not angry, just sad. Envy is the root cause >of discontent. --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 23:17:35 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:17:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051110231735.65326.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com> --- mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > > Is there any evidence that animals that hibernate > live longer than animals > that don't? Or that preventing an animal from > hibernating shortens its > lifespan? I am not sure that the assumption that > hibernation slows down > aging is necessarily true. Yes. It has been shown conclusively in bats. The abstract of the paper follows: Aging Cell. 2002 Dec;1(2):124-31. Life history, ecology and longevity in bats. Wilkinson GS, South JM. Department of Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. gw10 at umail.umd.edu The evolutionary theory of aging predicts that life span should decrease in response to the amount of mortality caused by extrinsic sources. Using this prediction, we selected six life history and ecological factors to use in a comparative analysis of longevity among 64 bat species. On average, the maximum recorded life span of a bat is 3.5 times greater than a non-flying placental mammal of similar size. Records of individuals surviving more than 30 years in the wild now exist for five species. Univariate and multivariate analyses of species data, as well as of phylogenetically independent contrasts obtained using a supertree of Chiroptera, reveal that bat life span significantly increases with hibernation, body mass and occasional cave use, but decreases with reproductive rate and is not influenced by diet, colony size or the source of the record. These results are largely consistent with extrinsic mortality risk acting as a determinant of bat longevity. Nevertheless, the strong association between life span and both reproductive rate and hibernation also suggests that bat longevity is strongly influenced by seasonal allocation of non-renewable resources to reproduction. We speculate that hibernation may provide a natural example of caloric restriction, which is known to increase longevity in other mammals. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Thu Nov 10 23:54:54 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:54:54 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation References: <20051110025946.18408.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com><4372FBCE.40808@sasktel.net><013601c5e5db$d50bb540$8998e03c@homepc><43738520.9000809@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <029401c5e652$25fbe8a0$8998e03c@homepc> Harvey Newstrom wrote: > Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO writes: >> Actually I have been thinking about this for many years (over 2 decades) >> and what has to be done is to put the body into >> near hibernation state and slow metabolism to a crawl. > > Is there any evidence that animals that hibernate live longer than animals > that don't? Or that preventing an animal from hibernating shortens its > lifespan? I am not sure that the assumption that hibernation slows down > aging is necessarily true. Offhand I can't recall specific evidence. Animals that hibernate tend to be specimens of species that hibernate and cross species comparisons are not completely trivial as other variables get introduced. Steven Austad to name just one person has almost certainly done some relevant work here. I suspect that it would almost *have* to be at least slightly true that hibernation slows aging (vs the exact same animal not hibernating) from cellular biology first principles. Animals like bears, burn up stored supplies of fat during hibernation. Their cells still use energy, in the form of ATP, whether they are hibernating or not, although not as much as if the animal was running around, they just get the energy from fat stores and oxygen rather than food. One of the biggest things that causes aging at the molecular and cellular level is oxygen free radicals being produced as a by product of mitochondria going about the business of producing ATP to be used to power cells at the biochemical level. Mitochondria did not evolve in such a way that it had to care that oxygen free radicals would be produced as a by product so long as the amount of incidental molecular damage (aging from free radicals) was no so great as to affect the genes getting into the next generation. Things that affect the chances of genes getting into the next generation are selected for or against. Normal aging hasn't historically (in biological terms) been one of those things as it only became a problem when the reproducing task was out of the way. Unless grandmothers or grandparents cared enough for their descendants that their grandchildren could get some concrete edge by having them around and helpful. Old elephants may remember water sources in severe droughts etc. Hibernation seems to be a strategy adopted by some species to match their food gathering efforts with the times when food gathering is likely to be cost effective for them. When there is going to be bugger all return for effort to be had chasing food in winter it probably makes sense in terms to eat more beforehand and then live of the fat stored. Humans live of fat (or glycogen) stores while we sleep and between meals as well. Do we age slower while we sleep? I'd guest that its probably slightly slower but perhaps not all that much. Our cells (which include more than just our muscle cells) are working on stuff that cells have to do (which is more than just moving us about) almost as hard when we are relatively inactive as when we are active and so ATP is still being generated by mitochondria and free radicals are still produced as a side effect. Brett Paatsch From mail at harveynewstrom.com Fri Nov 11 00:28:25 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:28:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <20051110231735.65326.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051110231735.65326.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1800de4c7f368ae5e90e50319de03863@HarveyNewstrom.com> On Nov 10, 2005, at 6:17 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > > > --- mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > >> >> Is there any evidence that animals that hibernate >> live longer than animals >> that don't? Or that preventing an animal from >> hibernating shortens its >> lifespan? I am not sure that the assumption that >> hibernation slows down >> aging is necessarily true. > > Yes. It has been shown conclusively in bats. The > abstract of the paper follows: Thanks! -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 11 02:34:20 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:34:20 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France Message-ID: <002f01c5e668$759e19d0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> "John K Clark" said: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France Jack Parkinson wrote: >> No one is ever delighted at earning 7 >> cents an hour. >Quite untrue. If everyone you knew was making zero cents an hour and was 24 >hours away from starvation and you were making 7 cents an hour and was a >full 48 hours away from starvation you would feel like Rockefeller. This is not 'quite untrue.' So far as I know there is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs. Yes, a desperate person will accept your 7 cents (in much the same way that drowning men are supposed to clutch at straws). However, you can be assured that they will not be delighted with you. >> There is plenty of wealth in the world. >Baloney. There is no way the wealth of the world could be divided up among >7 >billion people so everyone has a decent lifestyle, and you and I, the >pampered product of rich western culture, would be among those howling in >pain the loudest. However this need not always be true because Extropians >do >not think the economy is a zero sum game, in fact it's about as far from a >zero sum game as you can get. I didn't suggest dividing the wealth of the world. I pointed out that international aid agencies generally say that US $25 billion is adequate for basic food, water and medicine for everyone. This is not a lot of money in todays terms I think... Real equality of opportunity in education and employment would be the only other essential -people who can better themselves have some incentive to knuckle down and try. And there would suddenly be a much smaller ready-made pool of malcontents for the next wave of fundamentalist crazies to exploit in recruiting for the cause... As a strategy for conducting 'war on terror' - it may just be more effective than the one we have now. If terrorism (and rioting for that matter) are the radical extremes of massive discontent - eliminate the discontent. Jack Parkinson From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 11 03:05:16 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:05:16 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <002f01c5e668$759e19d0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <02f101c5e66c$be283650$8998e03c@homepc> Jack Parkinson wrote: >>Quite untrue. If everyone you knew was making zero >> cents an hour and was 24 hours away from starvation >> and you were making 7 cents an hour and was a >>full 48 hours away from starvation you would feel like >> Rockefeller. > > This is not 'quite untrue.' So far as I know there is no country > on earth where 7 cents an hour is sufficient to meet a person's > basic needs. Yes, a desperate person will accept your 7 cents > (in much the same way that drowning men are supposed to > clutch at straws). However, you can be assured > that they will not be delighted with you. There would be relevant social psych, organisational behaviour (remuneration) data on this point. Even studies with great apes like chimps and gorillas suggest that it is not just the size of the reward (food/money) but the relativity that influences how the recipient feels about getting it. I'd give extremely long odds (and be confident I could source the research to bear that contention out and win the bet for so doing) that no one normal would be happy receiving 7 cents an hour IF they knew that others were getting substantially better paid for exactly the same job. It must be something to do with how social creatures have evolved to expect some sort of proximity to equitable treatment and to resent the hell out of its absence. What does matter however is that the inequitable treatment be seen in comparative terms order for it to be perceived as inequitable. Chimps may be happy with small rewards so long as they don't realise they are being comparatively short changed. On that point one of the first things that goes into developing countries are broadcasts from Western media showing the locals how others elsewhere are doing. Brett Paatsch From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 11 03:31:03 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:31:03 -0800 Subject: Molecular manfacturing Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <20051110071554.1842.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051110071554.1842.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 9, 2005, at 11:15 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > > > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > >> I think that if it were considered to be an >> imminently realizable >> threat (or promise), dead-cheap molecular >> manufacture for the >> masses would be opposed by empowered minorities as >> though >> their existing privileges, their future economic >> aspirations and >> even their lives depended on it. >> > > I think history and contemporary third world culture > definitely corraborates your assessment. There are in > nearly all cultures past and present, those who would > cling so tenaciously to power (even of the most > mediocre sort) through undermining the power of their > neighbors. Thus they view political power as > minimazation of every one elses utility function > rather than maximumization of their own. > If we so structure our governments (or lack thereof) to sufficiently restrain what "political power" can accomplish then we will be free of many such ills. Remember that "political power" is using physical force or the threat of physical force to compel obedience regardless of the choices and interests of the compelled parties. >> >> Unfortunately (I should say in my opinion here I >> guess) molecular >> manufacturing is a *double* pipe dream. >> If it were technologically possible it would be >> politically >> impossible. Then change your politics or go around the system by disseminating the technology so widely that it could not effectively be controlled. >> Contemporary humans would "Fermi >> paradox" >> themselves. Most contemporary humans (Muslims and >> Christians) >> still purport to believe and act as though this life >> is some sort of >> rehearsal for a supernatural next one. Whilst that >> is so, >> molecular nanotech would be directed towards weapons >> construction. >> Yes. > > So very tragic it is that these people believe they > are rehearsing, not realizing that they are playing > improv to a packed house for a limited engagement. > Perhaps someday, we may be able to oblige these people > out of pity, by programming virtual heaven, hell, and > paradise and uploading them into their appropriate > after-life based on the reviews they recieve from > their critics in the audience. In the meantime many of these people have equal votes to you or I as to how to use the huge power of the state to force the wills of everyone and impoverish us all quite possibly leading to our and our species destruction. I am all for tolerance of willing imbecility. But don't give the imbeciles a loaded and utterly unchecked State to play around with. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 11 03:32:39 2005 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:32:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> If we are considering "riots in France" as the subject line says then I suggest caution in focusing primarily on the religion of the rioters. The reason that I say this is that there are obvious counter examples. For example, I live in the Silicon Valley (San Jose specifically) and there are many Muslims here. They are not rioting and burning cars. They have jobs and families and homes just like everyone else. And they are not isolated in public housing as I read is the case in much of France. This is not say that there is no racism here in Silicon Valley and certainly there are poor people here. But there appears to be a difference in levels and concentration and in the possibility of change based on individual and family initiative. Based on what I have read a key difference is that here in the Silicon Valley there are fewer government regulations and impediments for economic dynamism as compared to France. The levels and patterns of unemployment are different between Silicon Valley and France. So you do not have young Muslim (or other) males rioting and burning cars here, instead most of them are either in school or working. And many have good jobs in the local tech industry. Thus my point is that to continually focus primarily on Muslim in the analysis of the French riots is overly simplistic. Particularly when by every report that I have read the vast majority of Muslims are not rioting. I would also like to recommend the book The Future and its Enemies by Virgina Postrel. It is a popular level look at differences between dynamism and stasis in looking at social and cultural issues. For more info see: http://www.dynamist.com/tfaie/index.html Perhaps it will help clarify the thought processes of some on this list. Fred On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 12:45 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "Jack Parkinson" > > > Presumably, you will be impressed when this (silly riots in France) > > directly degrades the quality of yours and your families lives > > Anything that directly degrades the quality of my life or that of my family > impresses me; but a bunch of ignorant kids in France pretending to be > American gangster rappors is unlikely to do that. > > > Some of the richest countries are also Muslim. > > A few Muslim countries through a lucky geological break happen to be sitting > on top of a lake that contains 2/3 of the world's oil and so are rich, but > that hasn't stopped Nigeria, a Muslim country with lots of oil, from being > the second poorest country on Earth, beaten only by Mozambique, another > Muslim country. Continuing on our list of the poorest countries in the > world we have Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, The Congo, Bangladesh, Angola and > Afghanistan, all are predominantly Muslim countries. > > Let's look at a subset of the Muslim world, the Arabs. There are over 250 > million Arabs and they have most of the world's oil, but nevertheless the > GNP of the entire Arab world is less than that of Spain, a country with no > oil and a population of only 40 million. One reason for this may be that the > number of books translated into Arabic over the past thousand years is about > the same as the number of books translated into Spanish just last year. > > > Poverty is the root cause of discontent. > > No, if everybody is poor you're not angry, just sad. Envy is the root cause > of discontent. > > > Spoilt rich kids always praise their own benevolence > > I may be spoilt but I make no claims of benevolence, I make no claim that I > earned the right to be born in a western non Muslim culture, I was just > lucky. > > > No one is ever delighted at earning 7 > > cents an hour. > > Quite untrue. If everyone you knew was making zero cents an hour and was 24 > hours away from starvation and you were making 7 cents an hour and was a > full 48 hours away from starvation you would feel like Rockefeller. > > >They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of the > > golf club and an SUV. > > The people of South Korea have all that now, but 50 years ago they were on > that infamous list of the poorest countries on the planet. Things changed > when the Korean's complained about the injustice of it all so the rich > countries piled gold onto huge cargo ships and sent it to Korea until > everybody was equal. No wait, I misspoke that's not how it happened, now I > remember: The Korean workers said they'd rather not work for 7 cents an hour > and would prefer 70 dollars an hour and their employers said sure no > problem. > > Or maybe it was because the Korean people valued education in things other > than in a book of superstitions written 1500 yeas ago, and they had a very > strong work ethic, and they embraced capitalism with a vengeance. Maybe > that's why South Koreans were issued 15,000 patents over the last 20 years > while the entire Arab world had fewer than 400. > > The contrast between North and South Korea is also interesting, both started > with the same culture and the same language, but one had a tightly > controlled economy "to help the common people" and one did not. > Look at them now! > > Me: > >> would it be more moral of me to fire 99 workers out of 100 and pay the > >> remaining ones 7$ an hour > > You: > > Yes. > > Your position is indefensible morally and economically. > > Moral nonsense: > For every person I can hire there are a thousand lined up outside the gates > of my factory begging for chance to make the huge sum of 7 cents an hour; > and you, allegedly an advocate of more equality, advise me to make things > even more unequal by firing 99 out of 100 of my employs and give the > fortunate survivor the ridiculous salary of 7 dollars and hour. > > Economic nonsense: > Now that I have taken your advice my expenses are the same as before but my > output is only 1% of what is was, so I must charge 100 times more than what > I did before for my product, but at that price nobody at Wal-Mart will buy > it. Thus whatever my intentions I no longer have the money to pay my single > remaining employee 7 dollars an hour, or even 7 cents an hour, he now makes > zero cents an hour and I'm dead broke too. And this is the way to cure > world poverty? > > > There is plenty of wealth in the world. > > Baloney. There is no way the wealth of the world could be divided up among 7 > billion people so everyone has a decent lifestyle, and you and I, the > pampered product of rich western culture, would be among those howling in > pain the loudest. However this need not always be true because Extropians do > not think the economy is a zero sum game, in fact it's about as far from a > zero sum game as you can get. > > > I don't think this free market creature does exists and even doubt > > that it really can exist. > > Any particular reason? > > > Current 'free markets' are simply manipulated, tightly controlled > > strategies > > Yes, most markets are controlled by governments much more than is rational, > without that interference there would be far fewer poor people, perhaps none > at all. The freest of all free markets is the black market and that's why > it thrives. > > > to put the power and profits into corporate HQ's in the US and Europe. > > You almost make that sound like a bad thing. > > > Japan is in deep economic trouble now > > Trouble is a relative term. Japan is in economic trouble compared to the USA > perhaps, but compared with any Muslim country it most certainly is not, it > is in hog heaven because despite its difficulties Japan still has the second > largest economy in the world. > > > India is riding an economic boom > > Yes, India has improved in the last few years after it started to back away > a bit from decades of socialistic laws, regulations, and other brakes on its > economy. > > > China is likely to take the top spot as world number 1 economy within the > > next ten years > > Perhaps, but I don't see the point you're trying to make, it certainly can't > be that capitalism is a bad way to make the economy grow and the population > of a country rich. > > John K Clark > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 11 04:20:06 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:20:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> Ok Pat Robertson is warning of god's wrath: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/10/religion.robertson.reut/index.html If disaster does not befall Dover, I suppose it is our duty to warn the world of evolution's wrath. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 11 04:26:00 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:26:00 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <200511110425.jAB4Ppe15417@tick.javien.com> I wouldn't have expect to find it on Foxnews, but this article contains a reasonably good top level view of evolution. spike http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175179,00.html Behind the Controversy: How Evolution Works Thursday, November 10, 2005 By Ker Than A Kansas Board of Education decision essentially brings supernatural explanations into biology classes. Meanwhile, residents of a town in Pennsylvania ousted school board members who tried to do the same. Mainstream scientists see no controversy. Evolution is well supported by many examples of changes in various species leading to the diversity of life seen today. But others would invoke a higher being as a designer to explain the complex world of living things, especially such specimens as humans. Even the Vatican has weighed in. Last week a cardinal told the faithful to pay attention to scientific reason or risk returning to fundamentalism. So just what is evolution, and how does it work? Chapter 1 In the first edition of "The Origin of Species" in 1859, Charles Darwin speculated about how natural selection could cause a land mammal to turn into a whale. As a hypothetical example, Darwin used North American black bears, which were known to catch insects by swimming in the water with their mouths open. "I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale," he speculated. The idea didn't go over very well with the public. Darwin was so embarrassed by the ridicule he received that the swimming-bear passage was removed from later editions of the book. Scientists now know that Darwin had the right idea but the wrong animal: Instead of looking at bears, he should have instead been looking at cows and hippopotamuses. The story of the origin of whales is one of evolution's most fascinating tales and one of the best examples scientists have of natural selection. Natural selection Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by evidence from a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including paleontology, geology, genetics and developmental biology. To understand the origin of whales, it's necessary to have a basic understanding of how natural selection works. It is the process by which organisms change over time as a result of changes in inheritable physical or behavioral traits. Changes that allow an organism to better adapt to its environment will help it survive and have more offspring. Natural selection can change a species in small ways, causing a population to change color or size over the course of several generations. This is called "microevolution." But natural selection is also capable of much more. Given enough time and enough accumulated changes, natural selection can create entirely new species. It can turn dinosaurs into birds, apes into humans and amphibious mammals into whales. Mutations The physical and behavioral changes that make natural selection possible happen at the level of DNA and genes. Such changes are called "mutations." Mutations can be caused by chemical or radiation damage or errors in DNA replication. Mutations can even be deliberately induced in order to adapt to a rapidly changing environment. Most times, mutations are either harmful or neutral, but in rare instances, a mutation might prove beneficial to the organism. If so, it will become more prevalent in the next generation and spread throughout the population. In this way, natural selection guides the evolutionary process, preserving and adding up the beneficial mutations and rejecting the bad ones. How whales took to water Using evolution as their guide and knowing how natural selection works, biologists knew that the transition of early whales from land to water occurred in a series of predictable steps. The evolution of the blowhole, for example, might have happened in the following way. Random mutations resulted in at least one whale having its nostrils placed farther back on its head. Those animals with this adaptation would have been better suited to a marine lifestyle, since they would not have had to completely surface to breathe. Such animals would have been more successful and had more offspring. In later generations, more mutations occurred, moving the nose farther back on the head. Other body parts of early whales also changed. Front legs became flippers. Back legs disappeared. Their bodies became more streamlined and they developed tail flukes to better propel themselves through water. Even though scientists could predict what early whales should look like, they lacked the fossil evidence to back up their claim. Creationists took this absence as proof that evolution didn't occur. They mocked the idea that there could have ever been such a thing as a walking whale. But since the early 1990s, that's exactly what scientists have been finding. The smoking gun came in 1994, when paleontologists found the fossilized remains of Ambulocetus natans, an animal whose name literally means "swimming-walking whale." Its forelimbs had fingers and small hooves, but its hind feet were enormous given its size. It was clearly adapted for swimming, but it was also capable of moving clumsily on land, much like a seal. When it swam, it moved like an otter, pushing back with its hind feet and undulating its spine and tail. Modern whales propel themselves through the water with powerful beats of their horizontal tail flukes, but Ambulocetus still had a whip-like tail and had to use its legs to provide most of the propulsive force needed to move through water. Copyright C 2005 Imaginova Corp. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 11 05:38:28 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:38:28 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <002f01c5e668$759e19d0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <02f101c5e66c$be283650$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <007401c5e682$264f8610$0201a8c0@JPAcer> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brett Paatsch" To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France > Jack Parkinson wrote: > >>>Quite untrue. If everyone you knew was making zero >>> cents an hour and was 24 hours away from starvation >>> and you were making 7 cents an hour and was a >>>full 48 hours away from starvation you would feel like Rockefeller. >> >> This is not 'quite untrue.' So far as I know there is no country >> on earth where 7 cents an hour is sufficient to meet a person's >> basic needs. Yes, a desperate person will accept your 7 cents >> (in much the same way that drowning men are supposed to >> clutch at straws). However, you can be assured that they will not be >> delighted with you. > > There would be relevant social psych, organisational behaviour > (remuneration) data on this point. Even studies with great > apes like chimps and gorillas suggest that it is not just the > size of the reward (food/money) but the relativity that > influences how the recipient feels about getting it. > I'd give extremely long odds (and be confident I could source > the research to bear that contention out and win the bet for > so doing) that no one normal would be happy receiving 7 cents > an hour IF they knew that others were getting substantially better paid > for exactly the same job. > It must be something to do with how social creatures have evolved to > expect some sort of proximity to equitable treatment and to resent the > hell out of its absence. > > What does matter however is that the inequitable treatment > be seen in comparative terms order for it to be perceived as > inequitable. Chimps may be happy with small rewards so long as they don't > realise they are being comparatively short > changed. On that point one of the first things that goes into > developing countries are broadcasts from Western media > showing the locals how others elsewhere are doing. > Brett Paatsch Yes. Those are all points I would entirely agree with. Inequitable treatment must be seen in comparative terms in order for it to be perceived as inequitable. And it doesn't take a genius to work out just how equitable 7 cents an hour is. People who migrate to Europe/US because they are told they will earn twice as much or even four times as much, often fail to realise that their lives will be perhaps four or five times as expensive. They have stars in their eyes! An illustration of this is an email I received only this week from a Chinese ex-colleague of mine working in New York. Here in China, she earned a professional salary of just $233 (Australian dollars - say $175 US) per month. After just three weeks in the US she has a job working (natuarally!) in a Chinese restaurant. She told me she is "over the moon' because she nows earns over $600 (US) per month. Given that she is working until almost midnight 6 days a week - I wonder how long that euphoria will last? Admittedly - I know little about wage scales in New York - but it didn't sound too enticing to me. The other factor is that here - she is a professional. In New York - she is a skivvy, doing menial and essentially meaningless work. On the plus side, being intelligent, young and good-looking, she'll probably marry a stock broker and make good that way - unfortunately not an option open to all... Jack Parkinson From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 11 06:22:32 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:22:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <20051108193837.4970157F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <20051111062232.40170.qmail@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > Some of the > advice > in the proposed document amounts to creating inside-type forecasts, > i.e. setting up scenarios, looking at probable outcomes, and making > decisions on that basis. The paper we discussed last month shows > that > this forecasting methodology is not very good, unfortunately. It is > prone to cognitive biases of many kinds. > > Unfortunately it is not clear whether there is a better alternative > for predicting the future. Practical optimism: use what there is. Try to make it work for the best, but don't pine for what doesn't exist, unless you can help make it exist. From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 11 07:19:45 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:19:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <001901c5e690$4b97b600$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Fred C. Moulton" > If we are considering "riots in France" as the subject line says then I > suggest caution in focusing primarily on the religion of the rioters. .... I've suspected something like this was going on, as well: Cameras capture racist taunts of anti-riot police: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1865533,00.html Olga From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 11 08:04:35 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:04:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouraged on almost-final version In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051108093417.04db8cd8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051111080435.74508.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Having delved into the minds of certain types of folk perhaps a bit too much, let me see how I could twist and warp this against its intent - with the disclaimer that I'm an amateur compared to the types who will try just that in the real world... --- Max More wrote: > 1. Guard the Freedom to Innovate: Our freedom to innovate > technologically is valuable to humanity. The burden of proof > therefore belongs to those who propose restrictive measures. All > proposed measures should be closely scrutinized. So...measures to _restrict_ my freedom to sue technology developers on made-up whims should be harder to pass too? (Therefore suggest: "...those who propose measures to restrict new technologies.") > 2. Use Objective Methods: Use a decision process that is > objective, structured, and explicit. Evaluate risks and generate > forecasts according to available science, not emotionally shaped > perceptions; use explicit forecasting processes; fully disclose the > forecasting procedure; ensure that the information and decision > procedures are objective; rigorously structure the inputs to the > forecasting procedure; reduce biases by selecting disinterested > experts, by using the devil's advocate procedure with judgmental > methods, and by using auditing procedures such as review panels. "We believe that history will repeat, and that humans will still be fated to die. We predict that the elimination of death will, given the provably finite resources of Earth (if we forget to account for greater resource collection/production that more hands can result in), lead to great suffering." You might want to put in something about paying attention to *all* of the data, rather than selecting the data that the forecasts use based on convenience or to shape the intended outcome. (Number 3, "Be Comprehensive", speaks to considering the full set of reasonable alternative actions, but not to considering all the data.) > 3. Be Comprehensive: Consider all reasonable alternative > actions, including no action. Estimate the opportunities lost by > abandoning a technology, and take into account the costs and risks of > substituting other credible options. When making these estimates, use > systems thinking to carefully consider not only concentrated and > immediate effects, but also widely distributed and follow-on effects, > as well as the interaction of the factor under consideration with > other factors. "But have you done a full and complete analysis of what happens if we pay the clean-up workers $9.99 an hour rather than $10? What about $10.01? How do you know it'll be an insignificant effect if you haven't analyzed it? No, I'm afraid we can not consider your proposal without a full and detailed study of each wage level from $5 to $15, and include the half-cent-per-hour variations too!" You might want something about being comprehensive without descending into analysis paralysis. > 4. Be Open: Take into account the interests of all potentially > affected parties, and keep the process open to input from those > parties. "But...but...what about the fuzzy creatures? Who'll speak for the fuzzy creatures who we know in our hearts hate all development, just like we do?" -or- "How dare you suggest that my ethnic cleansing campaign is immoral?!? The people of my country will not stand your imperialism. Even if they are currently attempting yet another revolution to overthrow my regime and bring in your foreign ways." Suggest something like: "...open to direct input from those parties. If they are unable to speak for themselves, make sure that anyone who claims to be their representative actually represents them." There's probably a better way to say it. > 5. Simplify: Use methods that are no more complex than necessary You simplified out the period at the end of this one. ;) On a more substantive note, "nothing" is often considered the simplest possible method, including neoluddite know-nothing do-nothing change-nothing. Perhaps instead: "Use methods that are no more complex than necessary, while still following the other principles." > 6. Prioritize and Triage: When choosing among measures to > ameliorate unwanted side effects, prioritize decision criteria as > follows: (a) Give priority to risks to human and other intelligent > life over risks to other species; (b) give non-lethal threats to > human health priority over threats limited to the environment (within > reasonable limits); (c) give priority to immediate threats over > distant threats; (d) give priority to ameliorating known and proven > threats to human health and environmental quality over hypothetical > risks; (e) prefer the measure with the highest expectation value by > giving priority to more certain over less certain threats, and to > irreversible or persistent impacts over transient impacts. "Nuclear war is a potentially immediate, proven risk to all human life on the planet. It won't be a threat after we do it, so let's get it over with." -or- "Nuclear war is a potentially immediate, proven risk to all human life on the planet. So it is our duty to go destroy all nuclear weapons right now, rather than to clean up this oil spill we're standing right next to." -or- "I can guarantee the immortality of every member of this funding committee and everyone you care about, at least those who live long enough for me to complete my work. You're all expected to die within 5 years, right? No, I was just wondering. I'll need 10 years of guaranteed funding. Yes, I know people call my work 'crackpot' and say it would never work, but who else is promising what I promise? Oh, this session is sealed, so you're the only ones who'll know I promised a schedule, right?" Suggest: "(a) Give priority to reducing or eliminating risks...", and similar for b and c. Also suggest: "(e) prefer the measure with the highest expectation value by giving priority to more certain over less certain threats, to irreversible or persistent impacts over transient impacts, and to proposals that are more likely to actually be accomplished with the requested resources." > 7. Apply Measures Proportionally: Consider restrictive measures > only if the potential impact of an activity has both significant > probability and severity. In such cases, if the activity also > generates benefits, discount the impacts according to the feasibility > of adapting to the adverse effects. If measures to limit > technological advance do appear justified, ensure that the extent of > those measures is proportionate to the extent of the probable > effects. "OMGZ SOME NANOSTUFF IS TOXIC SO WE'VE GOT TO BAN EVERY KIND OF NANOTECH!!!111!!111oneoneone" - rough paraphrase of certain calls that were made approximately two years ago, in response to a certain study. Suggest: "If measures to limit technological advance do appear justified, ensure that the extent of those measures is proportionate to the extent of the probable effects, and limited to the specific technologies which justified the measure, rather than affecting related technologies which do not share the negative impact in question." Also suggest: "...only if the potential negative impact..." since, in general, "protecting" against positive impact is rarely justified if it truly is a positive impact (even though certain types would prefer most peoples' lot not to improve). > 8. Respect Tradeoffs: Recognize and respect the diversity of > values among people, as well as the different weights they place on > shared values. Whenever feasible, enable people to make tradeoffs. "It's good for you. Honest. But we'll let you make a tradeoff: you can trust us and take it, or be labelled a non-team-player/dissenter/non-patriot." -or- "Well...it doesn't cost me anything to give them this info I've been collecting about them without their knowledge, but I'm supposed to make them trade something off, so I should make them pay for access to their own data." Suggest: "...enable people to make reasonable, informed tradeoffs and other decisions, with enough information to weight that which is being traded off according to their own values." Also suggest titling it "Respect Other Peoples' Values", to reduce the emphasis on tradeoffs. > 9. Treat Symmetrically: Treat technological risks on the same > basis as natural risks; avoid underweighting natural risks and > overweighting human-technological risks. Fully account for the > benefits of technological advances. Suggest: "Fully account for the probable benefits of technological advances." > 10. Renew (Revisit) and Refresh: Create a trigger to prompt > decision makers to revisit the decision, far enough in the future > that conditions may have changed significantly. "We just implemented something we thought up last night, in reaction to the public panic of the week. Let's revisit it in a thousand years." Suggest something like: "...changed significantly, but soon enough as to be able to react to at least the initial impact." Again, there's probably a better way to phrase it. I hope these comments are of use. Again, there will probably be more profound misinterpretations (deliberate or otherwise) of this nature once this is published, but probing for possible openings and patching the holes thus found should diminish those. From femmechakra at hotmail.com Fri Nov 11 09:08:51 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 04:08:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <4371179E.9060504@pobox.com> Message-ID: A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of computational leverage Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe (such as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern physics consistency arguments. The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a sparse, high dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized observer mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial frame properties). This solution simultaneously addresses the semantical issue of unrestricted locality by maintaining a space/time metric but by going beyond the non-locality constraints of 4D physical implementation layers. A nonphysical mind really does exist: It should be amenable to study in the same fashion as other physical theories that deal with indirectly observable phenomena. Since humans are intelligent as well as conscious, they can predict computational theory to the key, requirement for a solution to the mind-brain puzzle. Such a theory must address the representational issue of information versus knowledge (or knowing). The problems.... vision and language, dynamic motion control, and cryptography, far exceed any conventional computing machine ability. Future scalability lrestrict's how to powerfullly design or build. The reasons: ordinary human intelligence may be a prerequisite to understanding consciousness. These strategies for providing extraordinary computing resources might also provide insight concerning computational processes with properties suitable for consciousness. It is possible that systems that exhibit the self organization required for human "real intelligence" (nothing artificial about it), may exhibit consciousness. Physics must ultimately develop a solution for human "real intelligence", because it represents an evolutionary, complexity increasing informational process. This process must not violate what physicists know about the evolution of the complexity of the universe. The question: Consistency frameworks form the physical foundation for multiple observational viewpoints or different "Points of View". Formally defining the interaction between the observer and the "action or thing being observed" is part of understanding the observation process. Historically, scientists have prided themselves in their belief that true science occurs when the observer does not participate or disturb an act of measurement. Unfortunately, quantum physics measurements depend on how a question is asked or what question is asked. If an experiment asks particle questions then the results are particle answers. If an experiment asks wave questions then the results are wave answers. Likewise in relativity, asking how much "energy" is in a system is dependent on the observer's velocity and acceleration. The main idea stated in Einstein's relativity: principle was that "all inertial frames are totally equivalent for the performance of all physical experiments."[18] In other words, no matter where you are in space or what speed you are traveling, the laws of physics must be the same. The laws define the possibility that all actions as well as the process of observing those actions are from any vantage point. One major outcome from relativity was experimental proof that the speed of light is constant no matter how you measure it, and no matter what speed you are traveling. In fact, mass, energy, distance, and time have changing values depending on one's speed. Facts: 1) Consistency is more primitive than conservation laws of energy/mass, or space and time 2) Consistency requires light to follow locally "straight line" geodesics (curved spacetime) 3) Consistency mechanisms behave as superluminal synchronization primitives 4) Consistency mechanisms interact outside normal excluding illegal time loops 5) Increased dimensionality increases degrees of freedom 6) These ideas appeal to researchers studying the mind and consciousness because certain biological[20], psychological[21], parapsychological[22], and meditative research[23] strongly suggest that these properties are exhibited by the mind. An interesting point to note concerning computational leverage mechanisms is that they deal with cosmological issues such as the framework of spacetime and the structure of the universe, and are thus, "outside the box" of what is normal day-to-day physics. This is not surprising given that the evolution of the mind (both collectively and individually) deals with many of the same issues (information, complexity, and energy) as the evolution of the universe. Conclusion: Modern physics theories that are based on observer consistency arguments have already defined many possible avenues for computational leverage based on indirect measurement and extraordinary views of space and time. These models of sparse hyperspacetime form a consistency backdrop for all possible events and all possible observer interactions. Consciousness may be a direct consequence of a dualist model of the mind-brain based on these consistency and computational leverage mechanisms. If the dualist model of the mind exists outside normal spacetime, then the mind is akin to a "Godel machine" that is capable of stepping outside of our normal spacetime limits. So.Yudkowsky.. A model of mind-body is proposed: from femmechakra what do u think? This is my first publication..i really have no idea what i'm talking about!..lol I just want an opinion _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 11 12:50:26 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:50:26 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Damien Broderick swrote: At 11:21 AM 11/10/2005 +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: >>Spoilt rich kids always praise their own benevolence when they hand out >>their loose change. The hot news is: No one is ever delighted at earning 7 >>cents an hour. They want a house with a manicured lawn, a membership of >>the golf club and an SUV. When they see someone like you buying and >>enjoying these little luxuries with the money they have earned you - they >>start thinking about torching cars and burning shops... >Jack, the odd thing is that probably every Aussie on this list shares your >basic perspective, while it remains bizarre and wrong-headed to most of the >US extropes. Hard to say why that is; we are not *utterly* slaves of our >nations' economics dogmas. I can't claim to represent all Aussies. In fact I was born in England, but have spent less than half my life there. I've lived in England, Australia, France, India and China - but I do find the unrelentingly conservative/capitalist approach that admits of no possibility of alternatives just way too prevalent in many communications from the US. I'm not even saying that it is totally wrong. Just that, to me at least - it seems a one-eyed view of reality. Even when it is right - it lacks empathy and a balanced appreciation of the factors that might influence dissent. >On the other hand, you're overstating your case just a tad. Rioters in >France aren't living on 7 cents an hour, and I doubt many of them are >earning the bourgeoisie their SUVs--it's exactly because there's no obvious >route to decent work that they go crazy with rage. Their parents, >generally, were imported as a dirt cheap labor pool--as many Europeans were >to Oz in the 50s--and technological/ educational shifts, plus pervasive and >fearful disdain from the haves, leave their kids with few prospects, even >as they watch endless TV shows, movies and games that goad them with >visions of wealth, ease, fun, and mayhem. My wife Barbara tells me DeSoto >and Thomas Sowell have much to say on the cultural backgrounds to these >topics, but the problems seem to me almost intractable by now. You are quite right. The 7 cents argument is not applicable to the French situation, this notion of 'absolute minimum wages' began as a generalization on catalysts of social discontent world-wide. French legal minimum wages would not allow this situation to ever arise. However the French have other ways of excluding the underclass - the rioters are 'inexpulsables' people who cannot be legally deported from France - but also people who are not wanted except as a potential labor pool willing (desperate enough) to work for less than the legal wage. These are the guys who sell necklaces and other cheap jewelry around the tourist sites, and are the barmen, bellhops, cleaners, waiters and other drudge workers if they are lucky enough to be not actually unemployable - at which point they either surrender to apathy or become pimps, pushers, prostitutes or gangsters according to their potential. They are easily radicalized and manipulated entirely because they are without hope and have nothing to lose. >Maybe dead-cheap molecular manufacture will end such strife, but I stand by >my .gloomy prediction in THE SPIKE a decade or so back that what we'll see is a >planet of Color Gang Wars and the like among those for whom life retains no >discipline or meaning outside of arbitrary local status and violence. Damien Broderick Dead cheap molecular manufacturing could end such strife - in the right hands (that is - everyone's hands) But, if and when it arrives - it's deliberate restriction to a privileged few could also give us strife we never before considered even possible. Unfortunately - I share your gloomy outlook. Jack Parkinson From riel at surriel.com Fri Nov 11 12:57:33 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 07:57:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] even if Arab poverty were terminated In-Reply-To: <20051110194714.93152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051110194714.93152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Al Brooks wrote: > Of course ending poverty wouldn't hurt at all, but you can see in > Western nations that fundamentalist xians and orthodox jews becoming > wealthy does not substantially alter their extreme religious views. However, in a more wealthy society the extremists are much more isolated from the moderate masses. Poverty and despair makes it easy for the extremists to convince people to give up their lives for the "good cause". -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 11 13:19:59 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:19:59 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On 11/11/05, Fred C. Moulton wrote: > > > If we are considering "riots in France" as the subject line says then I > suggest caution in focusing primarily on the religion of the rioters. > The reason that I say this is that there are obvious counter examples. > > For example, I live in the Silicon Valley (San Jose specifically) and > there are many Muslims here. They are not rioting and burning cars. > They have jobs and families and homes just like everyone else. And they > are not isolated in public housing as I read is the case in much of > France. This is not say that there is no racism here in Silicon Valley All that means is that they haven't reached the critical mass that makes self segregation and non-integration feasible. Try importing half a million, nostly unskilled non English speakers, in the space of less than 20yrs and see what happens. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 11 13:46:47 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:46:47 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <004a01c5e6c6$63a3f610$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Dirk Bruere wrote: November 10, 2005 5:11 PM >Well, what I *do* blame every Moslem, Communist, Fascist and Xian for is >propagating a vile >ideology opposed to almost everything I believe in. >The fewer of them the better. >Dirk Wonderfully persuasive logic there - 'my way or the die way.' If you had the power Dirk, you could just shunt them off to your Gulag to rot. Entirely in the interests of righteousness of course - nothing dodgy - these people ARE having impure thoughts... Jack Parkinson P.S. Xian? From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 11 14:05:26 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:05:26 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: even if Arab poverty were terminated References: <200511111320.jABDKee06122@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <006501c5e6c8$f9289040$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Al Brooks said: Subject: [extropy-chat] even if Arab poverty were terminated To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Message-ID: <20051110194714.93152.qmail at web51605.mail.yahoo.com> >If poverty were to be terminated in Arab nations, Arabs would still go to >war. The koran was >written in the 7th century, so for over 1,300 years >Arabs have beem reading advice such as to lie >in wait for infidels & jews >to ambush them at every opportunity. To attack the enemies of Islam is >an >unambiguous part of the radical Arab heritage, and though radical Arab >nationalists constitute >only a small fraction of Arabs, sympathy for >radicals is not inconsiderable. >Of course ending poverty wouldn't hurt at all, but you can see in Western >nations that >fundamentalist xians and orthodox jews becoming wealthy does >not substantially alter their >extreme religious views. I find the timescale quite interesting. Islam is in its 13th century. What was Christianity doing in that period? Militant crusades, repression with extreme violence and laying the groundwork for the inquisition. Becoming wealthy does not alter the views of extreme pro-lifers now either. Jack Parkinson From nvitamore at austin.rr.com Fri Nov 11 15:32:09 2005 From: nvitamore at austin.rr.com (nvitamore at austin.rr.com) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:32:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ARTS: Night Drawings Message-ID: <380-220051151115329937@M2W126.mail2web.com> Drawings in the Night http://www.turbulence.org/blog/archives/001717.html "With GeoDrawing, a GPS-based mobile drawing game for the Amsterdam Museum Night, "teams would go into the city where they compete on who would (geo)draw the most beautiful ?g8?? by walking with a GPS and a mobile phone. They could embellish their drawings with photo?fs and video?fs taken and submitted on the spot. The competitive element was creativity with both the drawing and the media. All submitted media were tagged to the geographic locations where they were taken. The player?fs movements, tracks and media could be followed in real-time through a webbrowser." [via pasta and vinegar]" Create! Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From nvitamore at austin.rr.com Fri Nov 11 15:32:35 2005 From: nvitamore at austin.rr.com (nvitamore at austin.rr.com) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:32:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ARTS: Music To Your Eyes Message-ID: <380-2200511511153235562@M2W065.mail2web.com> Music to Your Eyes "Before the advent of recording technology, listening to music was a very visual experience, as musicians and their audiences tended to occupy the same time and space. Christian Marclay's work often reintroduces us to the visual pleasures of music, in the form of images, sculpture, and video installations. Tonight at New York's Eyebeam, the artist presents Screen Play, a 'moving image musical score in which Marclay has combined found film footage with computer animation to create a visual projection to be interpreted by live musicians.' Members of three ensembles will respond sonically to Marclay's visual cues. Presented in conjunction with the Performa 05 Performance Art Biennial, the piece may be a mouthful to describe, but promises to deliver playful layer upon layer of performativity. Publicized stills from the piece hint at a meditation on the relationship between composing and programming while, in some ways, Marclay is really engaged in a de-composition and breaking-down of visual texts. Ironically, much of the computer animation comprising the 'video score' in Screen Play looks like the graphic imagery in old computer games. With pictures worth a thousand notes, this high 'score' will surely take your eyes and ears to the bonus round." - Marisa Olson http://eyebeam.org/engage/engage.php?page=unique&id=83 Create! Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mail at harveynewstrom.com Fri Nov 11 16:24:48 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:24:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> References: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:20 PM, spike wrote: > > Ok Pat Robertson is warning of god's wrath: > > http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/10/religion.robertson.reut/index.html Pat Robertson also says that hurricanes are God's way of attacking Florida for tolerating gays. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 11 16:52:10 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:52:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <007101c5e6e0$60397c10$75084e0c@MyComputer> "Jack Parkinson" > there is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour > is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs. That is true, it is also true that is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour will not get you closer to fulfilling a person's basic needs than ZERO cents an hour. You claim to be a great friend of the poor but you say I should fire 99 out of 100 of my employees and give all their salary to the survivor. You say Wal-Mart and its customers are villainous for encouraging sweat shops, so let me propose a little experiment; go to Bangladesh or some other such hellhole and tell a worker there that you are lobbying to have sweat shops such as his shut down and see if he really thinks of you as a friend. On second thought it would be better not to go there personally because they will try to lynch you. > I didn't suggest dividing the wealth of the world. Well why not?! You said before that there was already PLENTY of wealth in the world and that the only problem was that rich people were just too stingy, I said the basic problem was there was not enough wealth in the world and we should concentrate on making the pie bigger not squabble about how to cut it up; are you conceding that I was right and you were wrong? > $25 billion is adequate for basic food, water and medicine for everyone. > This is not a lot of money Forget 25, 250 billion couldn't provide just medicine for 300 million Americans for just one year, much less food AND water AND medicine AND for all 7 billion people on the planet. However I have nothing against charity, I think it's fine, but to suggest that's all that is needed to solve the problem is crazy. World poverty will be eliminated someday and probably sooner than most people think, but when a full accounting of that glorious achievement is made charity will amount to little more than a rounding error. > If terrorism (and rioting for that matter) are the radical extremes of > massive discontent - eliminate the discontent. Making nice to Islam will not reduce their anger one iota because the root cause of that anger is not any specific action committed by the west. They are angry at us for what we are not what we did. They would be less angry if the foundation of the west was dogma, even some dogma they didn't like, instead it is based on free markets and pragmatic problem solving (the scientific method) and that frightens and angers them. They would be less angry if our system just didn't work very well, but we're rich free and powerful and they are poor oppressed and weak. 800 years ago Islam was the most advanced civilization on Earth but its been straight downhill since, today they are not even second or third but dead last; we have the word of The Profit so it can't be our fault, it must be due to those evil westerners, our only mistake was embracing too many new 16'th century ideas, we should go back to the good old 13'th century ideas. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 11 17:25:27 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:25:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <00bf01c5e6e4$f2031f30$75084e0c@MyComputer> "Jack Parkinson" Wrote: > there is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour > is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs. That is true, it is also true that is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour will not get you closer to fulfilling a person's basic needs than ZERO cents an hour. You claim to be a great friend of the poor but you say I should fire 99 out of 100 of my employees and give all their salary to the survivor. You say Wal-Mart and its customers are villainous for encouraging sweat shops, so let me propose a little experiment; go to Bangladesh or some other such hellhole and tell a worker there that you are lobbying to have sweat shops such as his shut down and see if he really thinks of you as a friend. On second thought it would be better not to go there personally because they will try to lynch you. > I didn't suggest dividing the wealth of the world. Well why not?! You said before that there was already PLENTY of wealth in the world and that the only problem was that rich people were just too stingy, I said the basic problem was there was not enough wealth in the world and we should concentrate on making the pie bigger not squabble about how to cut it up; are you conceding that I was right and you were wrong? > $25 billion is adequate for basic food, water and medicine for everyone. > This is not a lot of money Forget 25, 250 billion couldn't provide just medicine for 300 million Americans for just one year, much less food AND water AND medicine AND for all 7 billion people on the planet. However I have nothing against charity, I think it's fine, but to suggest that's all that is needed to solve the problem is crazy. World poverty will be eliminated someday and probably sooner than most people think, but when a full accounting of that glorious achievement is made charity will amount to little more than a rounding error. > If terrorism (and rioting for that matter) are the radical extremes of > massive discontent - eliminate the discontent. Making nice to Islam will not reduce their anger one iota because the root cause of that anger is not any specific action committed by the west. They are angry at us for what we are not what we did. They would be less angry if the foundation of the west was dogma, even some dogma they didn't like, instead it is based on free markets and pragmatic problem solving (the scientific method) and that frightens and angers them. They would be less angry if our system just didn't work very well, but we're rich free and powerful and they are poor oppressed and weak. 800 years ago Islam was the most advanced civilization on Earth but its been straight downhill since, today they are not even second or third but dead last; we have the word of The Profit so it can't be our fault, it must be due to those evil westerners, our only mistake was embracing too many new 16'th century ideas, we should go back to the good old 13'th century ideas. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 11 18:30:09 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051111183009.33827.qmail@web81610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Anna Tylor wrote: > This is my first publication..i really have no idea what i'm talking > about!..lol > I just want an opinion I think it would help clarify your thinking if you used more formal language. One of the reasons formal language is, in fact, widely used for these types of things is because it helps people clarify complex thoughts - both for their own benefit, and to help communicate those thoughts to other people. (Having great ideas is of little use if no one else understands them. It is a fact of life, fair or unfair, that the burden of getting others to understand your thoughts falls more on you than on anyone else, because only you truly control how you express your thoughts.) For example: > A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > computational leverage Lose the colons. You're using them to denote association, but it is better to explicitly state what the association is. Also, note the object that performs any action. In this case, you might want: "I propose a model of mind-body. It is a potential ideal of computational leverage." Once you have it in that form, you can more easily see where more detail can be added (adding detail being one of the things that will help clarify your thoughts), or simply restate your thoughts more directly. For example: "I propose a model of the mind-body relationship. Accurately modelling that relationship can help turn mere computation into true artificial intelligence." > Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties > of the universe (such as space, time, and number of > dimensions) derived from modern physics consistency > arguments. Again, formal language: "Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe (such as space, time, and number of dimensions) are derived from modern physics consistency arguments." That second "are" can make more difference than it seems at first. And so forth throughout the document. From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 11 18:37:25 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:37:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> I came across an interesting statistic, the average resident of Mozambique makes about 80$ A YEAR. I'm sure they work one hell of a lot longer than 40 hours a week to survive but even at that figure my 7 cents an hour would be enough to push a person into the upper middle class, if Mozambique had a middle class. They don't. I figure they must be making about 4 cents an hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument and make me concede that I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to prove mathematically that 4 is greater than 7. John K Clark From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 11 18:50:12 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:50:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] should she or shouldn't she Message-ID: Hi Folks, Some of you who have thought of novel Transhuman approaches to aiding the professional women's dilemma of managing career and kids can go to this blog and add your input: http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/11/10/should-she-or-shouldnt-she/ It is the usual story, but I know that there exists a few technological aids here and on the horizon and so I gave one of my favorite partial-solutions (freezing eggs). I think that it is useful for you folks to hear some of the concerns and they are the type of people that would be open to new approaches. (and ... by the way, the participants of this blog are among the highest densities of scientific women I've seen so far on the Web.) Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin From megao at sasktel.net Fri Nov 11 20:08:47 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:08:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4374FA4F.6060701@sasktel.net> The fact is that until automation can replace all those 7 cent/hr or even 1 dollar/hour salaries the root cause of social unrest will not cease. Not that people ever will get enough, but middle class have different ways of displaying dissatisfaction than truly destitute slaves. With the increases in energy cost inputs , the slaves are more valuable than ever to the industrial world and there is the ethical conundrum. Total control and total domination of those able to create value in sweatshops to maximize global value chains OR Investing into the means to bring the lowest human condition base standard of living up to middle class to prevent the massive waste of resources a revolt of underclass creates. MFJ John K Clark wrote: > I came across an interesting statistic, the average resident of > Mozambique > makes about 80$ A YEAR. I'm sure they work one hell of a lot longer > than 40 > hours a week to survive but even at that figure my 7 cents an hour > would be > enough to push a person into the upper middle class, if Mozambique had a > middle class. They don't. I figure they must be making about 4 cents an > hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument and make me > concede that > I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to prove mathematically > that 4 is greater than 7. > > John K Clark > > > From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 11 20:14:46 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:14:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> References: <200511110419.jAB4Jve14907@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <63AA0AA1-5C31-4672-81D5-1890FEF27210@mac.com> Pat Robertson is the Anti-Christ. No, really. Almost everything out the man's mouth is 180 degrees off gospel. Perhaps he should receive the remedy he proposed for the leader of Venezuela. - s On Nov 10, 2005, at 8:20 PM, spike wrote: > > Ok Pat Robertson is warning of god's wrath: > > http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/10/religion.robertson.reut/index.html > > > If disaster does not befall Dover, I suppose it is > our duty to warn the world of evolution's wrath. > > spike > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From max at maxmore.com Fri Nov 11 20:34:54 2005 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:34:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Monsanto's genetically-modified revival Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051111143340.050087c8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> For those who didn't read the article in Business 2.0, here's my commentary: Betting the Farm by Eric Schonfeld Business 2.0, 08/25/2005 http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.aspx?coid=CO10170513354888 Over the last five years, Monsanto has repeatedly shown up in business writing as a cautionary tale-of how not to engage stakeholders or how not to plan for opposition. The next five years may see a very different treatment. After having been a strong and steady corporate presence in the USA since 1901, Monsanto lost $1.7 billion in 2002 following relentless attacks from critics of genetically engineered crops compounded by operational mistakes. In 2005, however, the company's seeds and genomics division is projected to earn $580 million on sales of $2.7 billion, which means the company will be making more profit from its biotech products than from its traditional products. In addition, the company's share price has doubled in the past 12 months. According to Erick Schonfeld, Monsanto's revival is a tale of nervy corporate decision-making, perseverance, and dazzling scientific achievement. Monsanto is directing 80 percent of its research money into its biotech seeds, while competitors such as DuPont and Bayer remain heavily focused on chemicals. This high-risk strategy could kill the company if something goes wrong with GM crops, but the potential upside is enormous too. Opposition in Europe to GM (genetically modified) crops remains strong, but is much weaker in the USA. The rest of the world looks increasingly promising, as exemplified by Brazil, where the government finally authorized sales of Monsanto soybeans earlier in 2005. Monsanto is using a new technique called molecular breeding to speed up the long and difficult process of genetically engineering plants to develop a single, specific, and inheritable trait. This approach can cut the necessary investment of time from ten years to three. Among the potential blockbusters under development are drought-resistant corn, nitrogen-absorbing corn, soybeans that produce heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids, and frost-tolerant seeds. Schonfeld points out the potential for the irrigation needs in the dry Texas panhandle, in bringing viable corn to barren parts of the Third World, and in reducing the need for freshwater, 70 percent of which is now consumed by agriculture. In 2003, Hugh Grant moved up from chief operating officer to CEO of Monsanto. He reinforced discipline in the organization and tightened its focus. This involved concentrating the biotech work on the United States and South America, and on three (rather than six) crops. He has also stepped up the effort to counter seed piracy. Black market activity can, however, actually benefit the company by familiarizing countries where GM crops are banned. The lack of proven ill effects from pirated seeds seems to have been a factor in Brazil's reversal. The article looks at some of the parallels with the software industry and Microsoft in particular, since Monsanto only sells its GM seeds if farmers sign a contract, similar to a software end-user license, forbidding them to replant any of Monsanto's seeds without paying a new annual fee. The company may end up benefiting farmers and the environment by growing more crops while reducing the use of fertilizer, pesticides, and water, while getting rich by collecting royalties for every planting of its smart seeds. Commentary with links to related material is here: http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.aspx?coid=CO10170513354888 _______________________________________________________ Max More, Ph.D. max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org http://www.maxmore.com Strategic Philosopher Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org ________________________________________________________________ Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com --- Thought leadership in the innovation economy m.more at manyworlds.com _______________________________________________________ From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Nov 12 00:43:08 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:43:08 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <00b701c5e722$0d839a40$8998e03c@homepc> John K Clark wrote: >I came across an interesting statistic, the average resident of Mozambique > makes about 80$ A YEAR. I'm sure they work one hell of a lot longer than > 40 > hours a week to survive but even at that figure my 7 cents an hour would > be > enough to push a person into the upper middle class, if Mozambique had a > middle class. They don't. I figure they must be making about 4 cents an > hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument and make me concede > that > I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to prove mathematically > that 4 is greater than 7. What universe are you living in where villains concede they are villains? If you want *someone* to convinct you of something I'm sure you could be obliged. You're the guy that thinks international law is pure farce as I recall, because there is no force behind it. Well your right about there being no force behind it. But the reason there is no force behind it is because at this stage in human history the force of international law depends largely on the honour and intellect of you and your countrymen. You already have a dead sentence over your head. You were born into it. You aren't exhibiting any behaviour that I can see that would qualify you for special positive treatment. If you are going to rely on future sapient entities for help (or to honour contracts made in their name) when you have considerably less to offer them and no force to bargain with what case is your current life and your current choice of arguments to develop making to earn you credit? Perhaps sitting on the fence, avoiding being worse than ones countrymen might be enough to make you avoid being deemed a villain, but you don't need to avoid a sentence (too late for that your already sentenced to being mortal), you need to positively earn a pardon for good behaviour. Would you want to reanimate some smo who in the era of slavery spent most of his effort saying his slaves ought be delighted at their good fortune of having him for a master as he personally gurantees them enough food to eat to survive? Fuck John, you are not a bad guy. But so far as I can see you are not by any obvious criteria a good one (one that the future is likely to feel motivated to expend some positive effort to have around) either. Nor am I. Brett Paatsch From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sat Nov 12 01:38:06 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:38:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into account the buying power of a dollar in that country? As in, if a gallon of cooking oil costs $2 in the United States, and $0.02 in Mozambique, that dollar is suddenly looking a lot more valuable in Mozambique, and only making 80 of them in a year suddenly looks a lot more reasonable. (Because common sense tells me that no one could live on $80 a year in the US, let alone as an average for an entire country, I must needs infer that $80 has a different value in terms of what it can buy. Dollars don't have inherent value; things that dollars can buy, do.) Is this a legitimate economic comparison of relative buying power, or an emotionally-touching sleight-of-hand based on exchange rates? I'm not saying this as any sort of smarmy straw man; I honestly don't know. Do we have any economists in our midst that could explain it to someone like me whose knowledge of classic economics is confined to senior year in High School? Joseph John K Clark wrote: > I came across an interesting statistic, the average resident of > Mozambique > makes about 80$ A YEAR. I'm sure they work one hell of a lot longer > than 40 > hours a week to survive but even at that figure my 7 cents an hour > would be > enough to push a person into the upper middle class, if Mozambique had a > middle class. They don't. I figure they must be making about 4 cents an > hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument and make me > concede that > I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to prove mathematically > that 4 is greater than 7. > > John K Clark > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 02:06:43 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:06:43 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511120206.jAC26Re17350@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution > > > On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:20 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > Ok Pat Robertson is warning of god's wrath: > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/10/religion.robertson.reut/index.html > > Pat Robertson also says that hurricanes are God's way of attacking > Florida for tolerating gays. > > -- > Harvey Newstrom Florida tolerates gays now? Things have changed much since I moved away. spike From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 12 02:24:48 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 10:24:48 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France References: <200511111900.jABJ0De11809@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <000e01c5e730$44570fd0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> John K Clark" wrote > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France > To: "Jack Parkinson" , "ExI chat list" > > Jack Parkinson said: >> there is no country on earth where 7 cents an hour >> is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs. > > That is true, it is also true that is no country on earth where 7 cents an > hour will not get you closer to fulfilling a person's basic needs than > ZERO > cents an hour. Yes. I made this point before. It was your characterization of these people as 'delighted' I objected to and still object to. 'Desperate' - yes. > > You claim to be a great friend of the poor I don't remember saying that... Altruistic motives are fine - But I am trying to make the point that there are good, solid pragmatic reasons why richer countyries should eradicate the nagging inequalities which cause dissent to become radical/militant action. We would: a) save money in the long run b) have a lot less strife and more peace c) need a lot less body bags d) be able to relax a little more at home and stop worrying that the fight is about to be brought to our front doors e) be able to bask in that warm glow you get from actually helping someone rather than simply using them >but you say I should fire 99 out > of 100 of my employees and give all their salary to the survivor. You say > Wal-Mart and its customers are villainous for encouraging sweat shops, I don't remember saying that either... > let me propose a little experiment; go to Bangladesh or some other such > hellhole and tell a worker there that you are lobbying to have sweat shops > such as his shut down and see if he really thinks of you as a friend. On > second thought it would be better not to go there personally because they > will try to lynch you. I have actually been to Bangladesh and seen rows of seven to ten year olds sitting cross-legged on concrete floors in hot, darkened rooms sewing shirts for western markets. They work for even less than 7 cents an hour - no money at all in fact. They work for food, from dawn to dusk and are beaten if they stop. Blindness is an occupational hazard from squinting at stitches and threading needles in semi-darkness. Some of those sweat shops were closed down while I was there (briefly probably) - and this lead to an immediate local increase in child prostitution. You are right if you mean to say there is no quick fix - but I think you are wrong if you advocate that nothing at all should be done. > >> I didn't suggest dividing the wealth of the world. > > Well why not?! You said before that there was already PLENTY of wealth in > the world and that the only problem was that rich people were just too > stingy, I said the basic problem was there was not enough wealth in the > world and we should concentrate on making the pie bigger not squabble > about how to cut it up; are you conceding that I was right and you were > wrong? There is no 'wealth problem' in the world and there is an abundance of food and medicine. Eradication of US and European farm subsidies alone would unlock 300 billion plus US dollars - more than enough to tackle and solve the eat/drink/stay well problem for every person on the planet. Trade barriers on poor countries cost poor nations at least 100 billion US a year - more than twice what they receive in aid. Just lifting these barriers may be enough in some cases. See: http://www.worldlegacy.org/HungerQuiz.htm http://www.feedthechildren.org/site/PageServer?pagename=dotorg_homepage Also, the OXFAM, Smith Family, NGO and UN websites have masses of information - and their are numerous scholarly articles on this topic.. > >> $25 billion is adequate for basic food, water and medicine for everyone. >> This is not a lot of money > > Forget 25, 250 billion couldn't provide just medicine for 300 million > Americans for just one year, much less food AND water AND medicine AND for > all 7 billion people on the planet. Not so! In 7 cents an hour country, this sum goes a LONG way... >However I have nothing against charity, > I think it's fine, but to suggest that's all that is needed to solve the > problem is crazy. World poverty will be eliminated someday and probably > sooner than most people think, but when a full accounting of that glorious > achievement is made charity will amount to little more than a rounding > error. Yes. You don't give someone a fish to eat. You show them how and where they can fish - then they feed themselves. > >> If terrorism (and rioting for that matter) are the radical extremes of >> massive discontent - eliminate the discontent. > > Making nice to Islam will not reduce their anger one iota because the root > cause of that anger is not any specific action committed by the west. They > are angry at us for what we are not what we did. They would be less angry > if > the foundation of the west was dogma, even some dogma they didn't like, > instead it is based on free markets and pragmatic problem solving (the > scientific method) and that frightens and angers them. They would be less > angry if our system just didn't work very well, but we're rich free and > powerful and they are poor oppressed and weak. Moslems are not angry at you! If you ever spend time in Moslem countries, you will find that the vast majority of people are kind, considerate ordinary people. Good citizens who worry about their children, take care of their families and wouldn't harm anyone. Most of them are quite secular in their attitudes and they generally admire the entrepeneurial business spirit of the west and aspire to be a part of it. They are also as repelled and non-plussed as anyone in the west by radical clerics exhorting jihad. Directing your fear and anger at these ordinary people is not just counter-productive - it's completely mistaken. > > 800 years ago Islam was the most advanced civilization on Earth but its > been > straight downhill since, today they are not even second or third but dead > last; we have the word of The Profit so it can't be our fault, it must be > due to those evil westerners, our only mistake was embracing too many > new 16'th century ideas, we should go back to the good old 13'th century > ideas. > John K Clark That last sounds like good old-fashioned prejudice to me. Although I would certainly agree if you were to say that a theocracy (of any faith) was the most cruel and barbaric form of government we are capable of. All rulers who claim to be 'channeling' God sooner or later seem to think that they can start burning or mutilating people. And every faith throughout history has committed atrocities in those places where the clergy has gained sufficient political power. The exception would have to be Buddhism - although even there, self-immolation is not unknown... Jack Parkinson From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 12 02:36:33 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:36:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > I figure they must be > making about 4 cents an > hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument > and make me concede that > I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to > prove mathematically > that 4 is greater than 7. > Would YOU do the job for 7 cents an hour? If not, then a moral case could be made that you are treating others WORSE than you yourself would want to be treated. This is sufficient in some morality systems to deem you guilty of wrong doing. Perhaps even a villian. ;) The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From mail at harveynewstrom.com Sat Nov 12 02:42:07 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:42:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: <200511120206.jAC26Re17350@tick.javien.com> References: <200511120206.jAC26Re17350@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Nov 11, 2005, at 9:06 PM, spike wrote: >> On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:20 PM, spike wrote: >>> >>> Ok Pat Robertson is warning of god's wrath: >>> >>> http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/10/religion.robertson.reut/index.html >> >> Pat Robertson also says that hurricanes are God's way of attacking >> Florida for tolerating gays. > > Florida tolerates gays now? Things have changed much > since I moved away. Yep. Dinsey lets gay people purchase health insurance for their partners and their children, just like regular folks. Who would have thought that religious bigots would still be fighting equal rights in the 21st Century? -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 02:51:53 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:51:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <200511120251.jAC2pae22362@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Bloch > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 5:38 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? > > I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in > under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into > account the buying power of a dollar in that country?... There was an interesting fictional debate on the dramedy West Wing this past week. The ambiguously evil republican senator pointed out that the reason businesses cannot make a go of it in most African countries is that the taxes are too high. If his comment is correct, the tax structure calls for the 30% tax bracket kicks in at 470 bucks a year. That being the case, I expect few would report salaries much above that. The tax structure is such that we don't know how much people make in these places. Political fiction fans: any guesses on how the election will turn out on the West Wing? I have a scenario: ambiguously evil Senator Vinnick wins in a disputed vote count (and recount and recount), where he loses the popular vote but wins the college. Then over the next two seasons, he will make a series of disasterous moves. Any predictions? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 03:01:38 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:01:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <000e01c5e730$44570fd0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511120301.jAC31Ne23542@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jack Parkinson >... And every faith throughout history has > committed atrocities in those places where the clergy has gained > sufficient political power. The exception would have to be Buddhism... This comment is worth exploring further. Is it true that buddhism is always peaceful, even in its extreme? I know of no examples of warlike buddhists, but I have witnessed firsthand extreme passivism by a buddhist. >... - although even > there, self-immolation is not unknown... > Jack Parkinson So long as it is *self* immolation, I suppose that is their right to carry it out. Religious extremists seem to be more interested in others-immolation. spike From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 12 04:09:41 2005 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:09:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs Message-ID: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> I recently ran across the blog of former list member Nick Szabo, http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/. I've been a big fan of Nick's for years, from back when he started the libtech list, pioneering a bunch of innovative ideas for cryptography and anonymity. Kind of like Robin Hanson, Nick got bored with what he was doing and decided to go off to law school. Nick has an amazing blog entry today called "Patent goo: self-replicating Paxil", http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/11/patent-goo-self-replicating-paxil.html : > In his novel Cat's Cradle, science fiction writer Kurt Vonnegut postulated > "Ice-9." Ice-9 was a form of water that was frozen at room temperature and > catalyzed any normal water it came in contact with into more crystals of > Ice-9. Once released into the environment, it froze all water, including > us. Eric Drexler in the 1980s raised the specter of nano-robots that made > copies of themselves and ate everything in their path: "gray goo." A > wide variety of similar hypothetical disasters have since been given > referred to as some sort of "goo." > > Self-replicating chemicals are not merely hypothetical: since Cat's > Cradle, scientists have discovered some real-world example of crystals > that seed the environment, converting other forms (polymorphs) of > the crystal into their own. The population of the original polymorph > diminishes as it is converted into the new form: it is a "disappearing > polymorph." In 1996 Abbott Labs began manufacturing the new anti-AIDS > drug ritonavir. In 1998 a more stable polymorph appeared in the American > manufacturing plant. It converted the old form of the drug into a new > polymorph, Form 2, that did not fight AIDS nearly as well. Abbott's > plant was contaminated, and it could no longer manufacture effective > rintonavir. Abbott continued to successfully manufacture the drug in > its Italian plant. Then American scientists visited, and that plant too > was contaminated was contaminated and could henceforth only produce the > ineffective Form 2. Apparently the scientists had carried some Form 2 > crystals into the plant on their clothing. Nick goes on to discuss how the same phenomenon occured with the anti-depressant Paxil and led to an unusual patent case. I thought it was incredible that a whole factory could be more or less permanently shut down once it is "infected" by the wrong shape of crystal. One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. Years ago I remember he came up with a concept that would work somewhat like a blog: imagine if you could subscribe to a mailing list which captured all of the email messages sent by a given person, to all the different forums and mesage groups he might participate in. The effect would be blog-like in terms of keeping you up to date with the ideas and writings of that person. I'd be interested in hearing about other blogs maintained by current and former list members. Maybe we could make a list. Hal From jay.dugger at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 04:32:13 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:32:13 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.com> > I'd be interested in hearing about other blogs maintained by current > and former list members. Maybe we could make a list. > Thank you for the pointer to Nick Szabo's blog. I learned a lot from him back in the early '90s, and I am glad to know he remains active. Does Marc Steigler blog anywhere? You might try looking for transhumanist blogs at http://del.icio.us/tag/blog+transhumanism. This doesn't cover very many blogs, but as more people use del.icio.us, the tag pair should turn more common. The technorati tags for it might also give good results. I haven't checked that. Amara might know. I suggest you repeat this question on wta-talk. Anders Sandberg blogs at http://www.aleph.se/andart, and Greg Burch at http://gregburch.net/burchismo. Earlier this year Mike Lorrey compiled a list of transhumanist blogs, but he's been pretty quiet lately. He might have a blogroll at his blog, The International Libertarian at http://intlib.blogspot.com/, or he might have gone over to Bloglines. Michael Anissimov has one at http://singularity.typepad.com/anissimov/. George Dvorsky had one called Sentient Developments, but that's been a zombie blog for a long while. I keep a blog at http://hellofrom.blogspot.com, but avoid transhumanist themes--too many co-workers read it. David Brin has a blog named Contrary Brin, but I stopped reading it--too much political content. Charlie Stross keeps a blog, but the URL escapes me. Any others? Any group blogs I missed? More generally, what other social software do you commonly use? For instance, who else keeps bookmarks on del.icio.us, feeds on Bloglines or Rojo, calendars on EVDB or upcoming.org? Who has public-browsable web archives at Spurl or Furl? The WTA has a Flickr account. So does Brad K. DeLong. So do I. Who else? What did I omit? All of this raw material surely could turn into something useful at the hands of someone with time and talent. -- Jay Dugger http://www.redcross.org Please donate if you can. From jay.dugger at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 04:36:04 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:36:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <5366105b0511112036l3ca37cb1w26701f19631b035d@mail.gmail.com> I'd also like to see Guilo Prico (sp?) blog. He pointed me at a tag-based discussion tool called Tagsurf (see http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008301.html), which seemed to match what you describe below. "Years ago I remember he came up with a concept that would work somewhat like a blog: imagine if you could subscribe to a mailing list which captured all of the email messages sent by a given person, to all the different forums and mesage groups he might participate in. The effect would be blog-like in terms of keeping you up to date with the ideas and writings of that person." -- Jay Dugger http://www.redcross.org Please donate if you can. From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 12 05:16:00 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 23:16:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.co m> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051111231445.01cda370@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:32 PM 11/11/2005 -0600, Jay wrote: > Anders Sandberg blogs at http://www.aleph.se/andart > Charlie Stross keeps a blog, but the URL escapes me. It's at Andart, above: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/ Actually I believe Charlie runs *two* blogs... Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 05:54:34 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:54:34 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511120554.jAC5sIe11114@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] oh my evolution ... > Who would have thought that religious bigots would still be fighting > equal rights in the 21st Century? > -- > Harvey Newstrom Who would have thought they would be fighting for creationism to be taught in public schools in the 21st? On that thought, I have a cheerful prediction. We took evolution for granted for so long that perhaps we just neglected the culture-war aspects of it all. I now suppose the serious efforts by creationists to teach intelligent design will force the issue to the attention of the sleeping proletariat. Ideally, many will recognize what an epiphany was Darwin's stunning insight. spike From moulton at moulton.com Sat Nov 12 08:54:37 2005 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 00:54:37 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1131785678.12021.735.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 13:19 +0000, Dirk Bruere wrote: > All that means is that they haven't reached the critical mass that > makes self segregation and non-integration feasible. Are you actually claiming that there is some critical mass that would result in the events of France happening in the Silicon Valley? If so then state exactly what is the value of this critical mass. Is it 100 or 200 or 500 or 1,000 or what? Or is it some percentage? What is it that you are claiming? > Try importing half a million, nostly unskilled non English > speakers, in the space of less than 20yrs and see what happens. We have had and still have many immigrants coming in. And many of them have limited or no English skills. Many of them are sneaking across the border to work cutting grass, waiting tables, manual labor and picking crops. Many send money out of the USA back to relatives. Some leave the USA after a few years but many put down roots, either get permanent resident status or become citizens. This area has had immigrants of all types; English speaking and non-English speaking, rich and poor, educated and uneducated. The factors why immigrants in the Silicon Valley are not rioting and burning cars like they are in France are ones that I and others have already mentioned. Factors such as a dynamic economy with fewer regulations, lower taxes and more entrepreneurial opportunities in this area as compared to France. Different government policies concerning providing of government housing assistance in this area as compared to France. Thus I repeat that this almost fetishistic and exclusive focus on the religion of the rioters shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the dynamics involved. The cultural and religious backgrounds of the rioters are only one part of a complex and a nuanced situation. And based on my local evidence just being Muslim does not lead someone to riot and burn cars. Fred > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 12 10:26:43 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 02:26:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051112102643.95712.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> --- mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > Jeff Davis wrote: > > Which brings me once again to the question: > > if I[...]rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow, > > can I rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow[...]? > > This is a circular, tautological question that > assumes its own answer before it is asked. Not at all. > If we assume that we can tweak bone marrow to extend lifespan, > would this allow us to tweak bone marrow to extend lifespan? Puleeeze! I assume nothing. I ask a question. And to the extent that it suggests a possibility, I ask if that possibility seems reasonable. To wit: Suppose I culture myself some "rejuvenated" bone marrow. By "rejuvenated" I mean composed of cells without shortened telomeres or nuclear or mitochondrial DNA errors. If I then replace my "old" bone marrow with this "rejuvenated" marrow, is it reasonable to suppose, theoretically, hypothetically, that I might achieve a restoration of youthful vigor in the functionality of my new bone marrow, and consequently a life extension result, a re-juvenation? Hope that clears things up, though frankly, I thought I was clear the first time. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 12:05:43 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 13:05:43 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <4902d9990511120405l93d571biaac6125698296285@mail.gmail.com> On 11/12/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in > under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into > account the buying power of a dollar in that country? They don't. And, as you say, taking into account purchasing power makes those figures more reasonable. Alfio From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 13:38:21 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 00:08:21 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: National Novel Writing Month - who's game to try? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0510152200s4520764et@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0510152200s4520764et@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511120538pfcec17s@mail.gmail.com> Is anyone else giving NaNoWriMo a go? I've just hit 20K words tonight. Oh the pain! On 16/10/05, Emlyn wrote: > I was just forwarded information about National Novel Writing Month. > Has anyone here heard of it? Basically, the idea is that over > November, you (and a zillion other people who've signed up) write a > novel, from scratch. > > http://www.nanowrimo.org/ >... -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 20427 (http://nanowrimo.org) From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 13:41:55 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 00:11:55 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051111231445.01cda370@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051111231445.01cda370@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511120541w13c405en@mail.gmail.com> I've got a couple of blogs, my main one is on the front page of my site. It's my own crappy code, with no RSS feed yet. I meant to have it by now, but NaNoWriMo has kicked my butt, maybe I'll be able to get to it in December. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 20427 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 12/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:32 PM 11/11/2005 -0600, Jay wrote: > > > Anders Sandberg blogs at http://www.aleph.se/andart > > > Charlie Stross keeps a blog, but the URL escapes me. > > It's at Andart, above: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/ > > Actually I believe Charlie runs *two* blogs... > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Nov 12 15:34:11 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 09:34:11 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] PARTY TODAY! Austin, Texas Saturday 11/12/05 2:00 PM into the evening Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051112093115.03053e98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Friends, This is a reminder! If you are in the vicinity, we would love to have you join in! _______________________________ CryoFeast party in Austin, Texas, on November 12th! Saturday, 11/12/05 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM (or later) RSVP: Natasha Vita-More (512-263-2749, natasha at natasha.cc) There's no better time to learn about cryonics on a whole new level. Join Natasha and friends this holiday season for a turkey dinner, videos, guest speakers, and plenty of Alcor giveaways. This is a potluck event, so please Bring One Food Dish with you, such as a veggie dish, salad, dessert or drinks. Feel free to contact Alcor for more information by clicking on this link: http://www.alcor.org/Contact/index.html Join your Texas cryonics supporters for CryoFeast 2005! Jennifer Chapman, Marketing Director ALCOR FOUNDATION (877)462-5267 or (480)905-1906 ext. 113 Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Nov 12 15:35:52 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 09:35:52 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] should she or shouldn't she In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051112093532.02caaf78@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Great post! At 12:50 PM 11/11/2005, Amara Graps wrote: >Hi Folks, > >Some of you who have thought of novel Transhuman approaches to aiding >the professional women's dilemma of managing career and kids can go >to this blog and add your input: > >http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/11/10/should-she-or-shouldnt-she/ > >It is the usual story, but I know that there exists a few >technological aids here and on the horizon and so I gave one of my >favorite partial-solutions (freezing eggs). I think that it is >useful for you folks to hear some of the concerns and they are >the type of people that would be open to new approaches. > >(and ... by the way, the participants of this blog are among the >highest densities of scientific women I've seen so far on the Web.) > >Amara > > >-- > >******************************************************************** >Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com >Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt >Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ >******************************************************************** >"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 12 16:17:57 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:17:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > Would YOU do the job for 7 cents an hour? If I was currently making 6 cents an hour I would not only take the job I'd be dancing in the street with happiness at receiving a 15% rise, or I would be if I wasn't too weak from hunger to do so. > you are treating others WORSE than you yourself > would want to be treated. Yes that's true, your happiness is important but not as important as my happiness. However there's nothing unusual about me, it's economic reality, everybody wants to get on the best end of an economic transaction and raging against that fact is about as useless as raging against gravity; instead we can use that information to generate wealth for the entire world through the free market. That's what Sam Walton did and I am convinced he created more wealth, including wealth in the third world, than all the international aid foundations in the world combined. John K Clark From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 16:47:11 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:47:11 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200511121647.jACGlDe15022@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John K Clark > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 8:18 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > "The Avantguardian" > > > Would YOU do the job for 7 cents an hour? > > If I was currently making 6 cents an hour I would not only take the job > I'd be dancing in the street with happiness at receiving a 15% rise, or I > would be if I wasn't too weak from hunger to do so... John K Clark This discussion reminds me of accounts of American GIs arriving at isolated South Pacific islands during WW2. They assumed the price of a harlot was a typical working man's pay for a day, which was about 15 dollars then. The premium harlots would get as much as 25 dollars in Toledo. The problem was a working man's wage there was a dollar a day; it had been that for a hundred years on the sugar plantations. One can imagine the economic impact. spike From pharos at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 17:02:14 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:02:14 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 11/12/05, John K Clark wrote: > Yes that's true, your happiness is important but not as important as my > happiness. However there's nothing unusual about me, it's economic reality, > everybody wants to get on the best end of an economic transaction and raging > against that fact is about as useless as raging against gravity; instead we > can use that information to generate wealth for the entire world through the > free market. That's what Sam Walton did and I am convinced he created more > wealth, including wealth in the third world, than all the international aid > foundations in the world combined. > This is the political opinion that the biggest gangster in town deserves to get as much as he can. It is not only self-satisfied rich folk who say that the poor deserve to be poor. Most dictators and their cronies in poor third world countries say exactly the same. Do you appreciate that Walmart is the biggest enemy that America has? See: Executive Intelligence Review Quote: During the last 20 years, Wal-Mart has moved into communities and destroyed them, wiping out stores, slashing the tax base, and turning downtown areas into ghost-towns. This is accomplished through Wal-Mart's policy of paying workers below subsistence wages, and importing goods that have been produced under slave-labor conditions overseas. Often, communities will even give Wal-Mart tax incentives, for the right to be destroyed. Wal-Mart both reflects, and is, a major driving force for America's deadly implementation of the Imperial Rome model. Unable to produce physical goods to sustain its own existence, the United States, like Rome, sucks in imported goods from around the world, using, in this case, a dollar that is over-valued by 50-60%. America has been transformed from a producer to a consumer society. From the 1940s through the early 1960s, through its technologically-advanced manufacturing-agricultural economy, America produced new value that contributed to mankind's advancement. Through a "post-industrial society" policy, the bankers have pushed Wal-Mart to the top of the heap, so that it is now the world's largest corporation, with $245.5 billion in sales last year. Wal-Mart, which produces no value-added whatsoever, dominates the geometry that governs the U.S. consumer society. America consumes goods that others produce, which Wal-Mart markets. Wal-Mart dictates, through its demand for low prices, that its suppliers outsource their production to foreign nations, further ripping down America's battered domestic manufacturing and agricultural capability, in a self-feeding process. Read on for more gory detail. BillK From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 12 17:20:30 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:20:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain><002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> <00b701c5e722$0d839a40$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <00f101c5e7ad$6e55c380$d6054e0c@MyComputer> "Brett Paatsch" > You're the guy that thinks international law is pure farce as I recall I don't quite see the connection with 7 cent an hour sweatshops but yes, I do seem to recall saying something along those lines. > because there is no force behind it. Well, if policemen had no guns and no arms, or legs, and were blind and deaf, and a burglar broke into your home, would you call the police of reach for your gun? >the reason there is no force behind it is because at this stage in human >history the force of international law depends largely on the honour and >intellect of you and your countrymen. Yes, things would be much more honorable and intelligent if the UN ran the world, the organization that picked Libya (of Lockerbie fame) to run the Human Rights Commission. > Would you want to reanimate some smo who in the era of > slavery spent most of his effort saying his slaves ought be > delighted at their good fortune If he also had a practical workable plan that would eliminate slavery I would pick him in a instant over a person who blubbered and cried and flogged himself with whips to demonstrate to the world how profoundly he hated slavery but who's advice was so incredibly mind numbingly stupid it would actually strengthen that diabolical institution. > Fuck John, you are not a bad guy. But so far as I can see you are not > by any obvious criteria a good one (one that the future is likely to > feel motivated to expend some positive effort to have around) either. Face it, there is precious little reason a Jupiter Brain would bother bringing anybody alive now back. Maybe we'd have a very tiny nostalgia value to Mr. Jupiter, or maybe he'd do it just for laughs because it will either be absolutely imposable or dirt cheap. John K Clark From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 12 17:41:48 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 09:41:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511121741.jACHfVe22673@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK ... > > Do you appreciate that Walmart is the biggest enemy that America has? > > See: Executive Intelligence Review > > > Quote: > During the last 20 years, Wal-Mart has moved into communities and > destroyed them, wiping out stores, slashing the tax base, and turning > downtown areas into ghost-towns... BillK BillK, how is that destroying communities? Sounds to me like Walmart is facilitating urban renewal thru free markets. Those that oppose are free to trade elsewhere, opting instead to search for the most expensive mom and pop stores. I highly encourage this, so that they may get sweet revenge on that bad old Walmart, by brutally not shopping there. For the rest of us not so disposed, Walmart is our friend. spike From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 12 17:45:08 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:45:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> "BillK" > Do you appreciate that Walmart is the biggest enemy that America has? I have been on this list for about 10 years and I believe the above remark is the single stupidest statement I have ever seen here, well....Ok, there was that fellow who said he could levitate the Great Wall Of China with Yoga, but it would certainly make the top ten list. And Mr. BillK a word of advice, you would gain more credibility on this list if you didn't mention that a Lyndon Larouche web page was the source of all your profound ideas. John K Clark From megao at sasktel.net Sat Nov 12 17:51:31 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:51:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <43762BA3.1060007@sasktel.net> However, a clever society should then produce higher value goods on its freed up productive capacity. This is my argument when I tell people that 700 acres of hemp when harvested and processed for nutraceuticals has the same 5 million dollar plus value as 23,000 acres of lentils, one of the higher value agricultural commodities. Which is better.... to expand and compete with a high value to start from or claw for the last dollar to spend to make a marginal return from repeating past patterns. In an ever more wealthy society the value of the basic goods should continue to reduce in value in order for money to be available for new high value goods. How are you going to pay for a life-long body regeneration plan if you spend 70% of you disposable income on food, clothes and shelter. If the technology is perfected to create the life-extension industry I would say that perhaps 40-95 % of the average annual income might initially be required to pay for it. My first 8 digit calculator in 1970 was 125$ and not 2$ as it is now. someone has to re-arrange societal economics to pay for the technology to be developed. These nanotech/infotech based "santa claus" machines we talk about are going to render most productive capacity of the ordinary kind obselete, but those people and resources are going to have to move up the food chain to create and service the new technology. But I do like to see a need to level out the value for service globally so that all citizens can afford the newest technological wonders. You can't buy distance education and internet access to your computer and blackberry on 7 cents/day of income. You can't travel from your hovel in ethiopia to anywhere new and interesting on 7 cents/day and so forth. I know someone will point to China and say.. not so... but there is a realistic limit to that argument. MFJ > See: Executive Intelligence Review > >> <> >> >> Wal-Mart both reflects, and is, a major driving force for America's >> deadly implementation of the Imperial Rome model. Unable to produce >> physical goods to sustain its own existence, the United States, like >> Rome, sucks in imported goods from around the world, using, in this >> case, a dollar that is over-valued by 50-60%. America has been >> transformed from a producer to a consumer society. From the 1940s >> through the early 1960s, through its technologically-advanced >> manufacturing-agricultural economy, America produced new value that >> contributed to mankind's advancement. Through a "post-industrial >> society" policy, the bankers have pushed Wal-Mart to the top of the >> heap, so that it is now the world's largest corporation, with $245.5 >> billion in sales last year. Wal-Mart, which produces no value-added >> whatsoever, dominates the geometry that governs the U.S. consumer >> society. America consumes goods that others produce, which Wal-Mart >> markets. Wal-Mart dictates, through its demand for low prices, that >> its suppliers outsource their production to foreign nations, further >> ripping down America's battered domestic manufacturing and >> agricultural capability, in a self-feeding process. >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Sat Nov 12 17:56:33 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:56:33 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <20051112102643.95712.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051112102643.95712.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 12, 2005, at 5:26 AM, Jeff Davis wrote: > --- mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > >> Jeff Davis wrote: >>> Which brings me once again to the question: >>> if I[...]rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow, >>> can I rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow[...]? >> >> This is a circular, tautological question that >> assumes its own answer before it is asked. > > Not at all. > >> If we assume that we can tweak bone marrow to extend > lifespan, >> would this allow us to tweak bone marrow to extend > lifespan? > > Puleeeze! I assume nothing. I ask a question. And > to the extent that it suggests a possibility, I ask if > that possibility seems reasonable. To wit: Suppose I > culture myself some "rejuvenated" bone marrow. By > "rejuvenated" I mean composed of cells without > shortened telomeres or nuclear or mitochondrial DNA > errors. If I then replace my "old" bone marrow with > this "rejuvenated" marrow, is it reasonable to > suppose, theoretically, hypothetically, that I might > achieve a restoration of youthful vigor in the > functionality of my new bone marrow, and consequently > a life extension result, a re-juvenation? > > Hope that clears things up, though frankly, I thought > I was clear the first time. Yes, I understood it the first time. Nothing has changed. I hope I can make myself clear this time. Your starting point is; "if I rejuvenated bone marrow" Your ending point is: "resulting in rejuvenated bone marrow" Your starting point is the same as your ending point. Your final question is whether you have the thing you started with. No matter how wide the territory in-between, you end up where you started. Hence, a circle. Your entire if...then...therefore sequence is a circular argument where the conclusion statement at the end exactly matches your premise statement at the beginning. Your logical premise and conclusion boil down to "assuming I have X.... do you admit I have X?" This is a self-defined logical construct whose answer must always be "yes". You answer your final question with your beginning premise. No one can say you can't end up with rejuvenated bone marrow, because your first sentence , because the premise that is to be assumed answers the question at the end. It is a well-known logical fallacy known as circular logic. If you really can't understand the above, then let me simply answer your question: If you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, you will indeed end up with rejuvenated bone marrow as you say. But if you can't rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, then I don't believe you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say. Does that answer your question? -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From brian at posthuman.com Sat Nov 12 18:12:01 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:12:01 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511121741.jACHfVe22673@tick.javien.com> References: <200511121741.jACHfVe22673@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <43763071.7030600@posthuman.com> I encourage everyone to see the South Park expose of the true evil heart of Wall*Mart :-) -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 18:25:18 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:25:18 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <001901c5e690$4b97b600$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <001901c5e690$4b97b600$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <4902d9990511121025m33e5d13dke88a299ade72f0a3@mail.gmail.com> On 11/11/05, Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Fred C. Moulton" > > > If we are considering "riots in France" as the subject line says then I > > suggest caution in focusing primarily on the religion of the rioters. .... > > I've suspected something like this was going on, as well: > > Cameras capture racist taunts of anti-riot police: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1865533,00.html On the same lines, a high-quality article by the Economist about the riots http://www.economist.com/agenda/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5138990 which discusses the Islam problem without falling in the "Islam bad" trap and makes clear how ordinary racism is the problem. From pharos at gmail.com Sat Nov 12 18:51:13 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:51:13 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 11/12/05, John K Clark wrote: > "BillK" > > > Do you appreciate that Walmart is the biggest enemy that America has? > > I have been on this list for about 10 years and I believe the above remark > is the single stupidest statement I have ever seen here, well....Ok, there > was that fellow who said he could levitate the Great Wall Of China with > Yoga, but it would certainly make the top ten list. And Mr. BillK a word > of advice, you would gain more credibility on this list if you didn't > mention that a Lyndon Larouche web page was the source of all your > profound ideas. > > John K Clark > Who's Lyndon Larouche? I've never heard of him. I was reading the message, not criticising the messenger. But apart from him, there are many Walmart critics, websites, blogs, news reports. Do some googling, if you are unaware of them. Here is a Dems report on Walmart's low wages for example. And there is still the problem of much of USA production being moved overseas and internal production facilities being shut down. Production jobs being moved overseas to low wage economies is still a problem, no matter the credentials of the person pointing it out. BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 12 23:44:19 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 15:44:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <745E0696-420F-4A32-BB27-141BFD8D0E79@mac.com> Context is everything. On Nov 11, 2005, at 6:36 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > > > --- John K Clark wrote: > > >> I figure they must be >> making about 4 cents an >> hour now, so all you have to do to win the argument >> and make me concede that >> I am a villain for paying 7 cents an hour is to >> prove mathematically >> that 4 is greater than 7. >> >> > > Would YOU do the job for 7 cents an hour? If not, then > a moral case could be made that you are treating > others WORSE than you yourself would want to be > treated. This is sufficient in some morality systems > to deem you guilty of wrong doing. Perhaps even a > villian. ;) > > > The Avantguardian > is > Stuart LaForge > alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu > > "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to > live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. > > > > __________________________________ > Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. > http://farechase.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 12 23:58:32 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 15:58:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <200511120301.jAC31Ne23542@tick.javien.com> References: <200511120301.jAC31Ne23542@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <375EE2BC-812D-4A92-B4D8-883FDCB58CCF@mac.com> A few odds and ends on less than peaceful Buddhist activity follow. http://www.darkzen.com/Articles/zenholy.htm http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/6/bartho991.htm http://www.berzinarchives.com/kalachakra/ holy_war_buddhism_islam_shambhala_long.html http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/dalitism/dal000/budsinbk.html http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/15293.htm http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0700716823?v=glance Generally Buddhist teaching is markedly pacifist. However many Buddhist leaders have supported various wars and on occasion Buddhist armies have been fielded. - samantha On Nov 11, 2005, at 7:01 PM, spike wrote: >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jack Parkinson >> > > >> ... And every faith throughout history has >> committed atrocities in those places where the clergy has gained >> sufficient political power. The exception would have to be >> Buddhism... >> > > This comment is worth exploring further. Is it true that > buddhism is always peaceful, even in its extreme? I know > of no examples of warlike buddhists, but I have witnessed > firsthand extreme passivism by a buddhist. > > >> ... - although even >> there, self-immolation is not unknown... >> Jack Parkinson >> > > So long as it is *self* immolation, I suppose that > is their right to carry it out. Religious extremists > seem to be more interested in others-immolation. > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From moulton at moulton.com Sun Nov 13 00:41:31 2005 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:41:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <4902d9990511121025m33e5d13dke88a299ade72f0a3@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <001901c5e690$4b97b600$6600a8c0@brainiac> <4902d9990511121025m33e5d13dke88a299ade72f0a3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1131842491.12021.817.camel@localhost.localdomain> Alfio Thanks for the pointer to the Economist article, it was interesting. Fred On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 19:25 +0100, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On 11/11/05, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > From: "Fred C. Moulton" > > > > > If we are considering "riots in France" as the subject line says then I > > > suggest caution in focusing primarily on the religion of the rioters. .... > > > > I've suspected something like this was going on, as well: > > > > Cameras capture racist taunts of anti-riot police: > > > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1865533,00.html > > On the same lines, a high-quality article by the Economist about the riots > > http://www.economist.com/agenda/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5138990 > > which discusses the Islam problem without falling in the "Islam bad" > trap and makes clear how ordinary racism is the problem. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 13 02:08:34 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:08:34 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK ... > Production jobs being moved overseas to low wage economies is still a > problem, no matter the credentials of the person pointing it out. BillK If production is done by nanotech miracle factories, the result is exactly the same as offshoring, is it not? Yet we don't dread that at all, we fondly anticipate it. We would need to come up with a new name for manufacturing jobs lost to nanotech. Downsourcing? In-shoring? spike From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 02:34:12 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:34:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051113023412.23563.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com> --- Harvey Newstrom wrote: > Yes, I understood it the first time. Apparently not. > Nothing has changed. Indeed, so. You still don't get it, inventing a meaning, and a circularity that isn't there. > I hope I can make myself clear this time. You were clear the first time. > > Your starting point is; "if I rejuvenated [my] bone > marrow" Right so far. > Your ending point is: "resulting in rejuvenated bone > marrow" No, this is not the ending point. You misunderstand in thinking so. This is **your** restatement of my starting point, which you have, on your own initiative, plunked down at this point and attributed to me as a repetition of my starting point and a circularity of reasoning. YOU did this, misunderstanding me. I did not. One last time. If I manipulate my "aged" bone marrow, so as to cause it to possess once again the characteristics it had when I was young and spry (this is the starting part, the "if I rejuvenate my bone marrow" part),(now here's the ending part) what will be the consequences for the larger system composed of my otherwise old body with its now newly "rejuvenated" bone marrow? This is not an argument, it is an open-ended question. I do not presume to draw a conclusion, nor force one on anyone else. I'm just asking a question. Clearly I am hoping for, hypothesizing the possibility of a health-enhancing outcome. But I am being cautious, recognizing that the biological system is quite complex, and that the consequences of such gross tinkering as suggested by my question may not have the hoped-for outcome. Harvey, you're an exceedingly bright fellow and not usually this obtuse. Is something else going on? Have I annoyed you? Best, Jeff Davis "Enjoying being insulting is a youthful corruption of power. You lose your taste for it when you realize how hard people try, how much they mind, and how long they remember." Martin Amis > > Your starting point is the same as your ending > point. Your final > question is whether you have the thing you started > with. No matter how > wide the territory in-between, you end up where you > started. Hence, a > circle. Your entire if...then...therefore sequence > is a circular > argument where the conclusion statement at the end > exactly matches your > premise statement at the beginning. > > Your logical premise and conclusion boil down to > "assuming I have X.... > do you admit I have X?" This is a self-defined > logical construct whose > answer must always be "yes". You answer your final > question with your > beginning premise. No one can say you can't end up > with rejuvenated > bone marrow, because your first sentence , because > the premise that is > to be assumed answers the question at the end. It > is a well-known > logical fallacy known as circular logic. > > If you really can't understand the above, then let > me simply answer > your question: > If you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, you > will indeed end up > with rejuvenated bone marrow as you say. > But if you can't rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, > then I don't > believe you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say. > Does that answer your question? > > -- > Harvey Newstrom > CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS > IBMCP > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 02:35:55 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:35:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051113023555.95441.qmail@web60020.mail.yahoo.com> --- Harvey Newstrom wrote: > Yes, I understood it the first time. Apparently not. > Nothing has changed. Indeed, so. You still don't get it, inventing a meaning, and a circularity that isn't there. > I hope I can make myself clear this time. You were clear the first time. > > Your starting point is; "if I rejuvenated [my] bone > marrow" Right so far. > Your ending point is: "resulting in rejuvenated bone > marrow" No, this is not the ending point. You misunderstand in thinking so. This is **your** restatement of my starting point, which you have, on your own initiative, plunked down at this point and attributed to me as a repetition of my starting point and a circularity of reasoning. YOU did this, misunderstanding me. I did not. One last time. If I manipulate my "aged" bone marrow, so as to cause it to possess once again the characteristics it had when I was young and spry (this is the starting part, the "if I rejuvenate my bone marrow" part),(now here's the ending part) what will be the consequences for the larger system composed of my otherwise old body with its now newly "rejuvenated" bone marrow? This is not an argument, it is an open-ended question. I do not presume to draw a conclusion, nor force one on anyone else. I'm just asking a question. Clearly I am hoping for, hypothesizing the possibility of a health-enhancing outcome. But I am being cautious, recognizing that the biological system is quite complex, and that the consequences of such gross tinkering as suggested by my question may not have the hoped-for outcome. Harvey, you're an exceedingly bright fellow and not usually this obtuse. Is something else going on? Have I annoyed you? Best, Jeff Davis "Enjoying being insulting is a youthful corruption of power. You lose your taste for it when you realize how hard people try, how much they mind, and how long they remember." Martin Amis > > Your starting point is the same as your ending > point. Your final > question is whether you have the thing you started > with. No matter how > wide the territory in-between, you end up where you > started. Hence, a > circle. Your entire if...then...therefore sequence > is a circular > argument where the conclusion statement at the end > exactly matches your > premise statement at the beginning. > > Your logical premise and conclusion boil down to > "assuming I have X.... > do you admit I have X?" This is a self-defined > logical construct whose > answer must always be "yes". You answer your final > question with your > beginning premise. No one can say you can't end up > with rejuvenated > bone marrow, because your first sentence , because > the premise that is > to be assumed answers the question at the end. It > is a well-known > logical fallacy known as circular logic. > > If you really can't understand the above, then let > me simply answer > your question: > If you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, you > will indeed end up > with rejuvenated bone marrow as you say. > But if you can't rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, > then I don't > believe you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say. > Does that answer your question? > > -- > Harvey Newstrom > CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS > IBMCP > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 13 03:05:00 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:05:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:08 PM 11/12/2005 -0800, spike wrote: >If production is done by nanotech miracle factories, >the result is exactly the same as offshoring, is it >not? Yet we don't dread that at all, we fondly >anticipate it. I do dread it, for exactly the reason I gestured at a few days ago (although I left out some of the steps): People (young men especially) with full bellies gained effortlessly, but lacking meaning in their lives, often seem to find purpose fast in ganging up on each other in fits of murderous primate chest-pounding. Making Soma the opium of the people might help, but that's a pretty sickening prospect. It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the top 2 IQ percentiles. Damien Broderick From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 13 03:32:29 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:32:29 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? References: <200511121742.jACHg7e22787@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <003101c5e802$e7e880c0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: Alfio Puglisi > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? > To: ExI chat list > Message-ID: > <4902d9990511120405l93d571biaac6125698296285 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On 11/12/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: >> I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in >> under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into >> account the buying power of a dollar in that country? > > They don't. And, as you say, taking into account purchasing power > makes those figures more reasonable. > > Alfio Poverty can never be called reasonable. By definition it is less than the level required for basic neccessities. The basis for the statistics is well-established this snip from: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPA/0,,contentMDK:20153855~menuPK:435040~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:430367,00.html Measuring poverty at the country level A common method used to measure poverty is based on incomes or consumption levels. A person is considered poor if his or her consumption or income level falls below some minimum level necessary to meet basic needs. This minimum level is usually called the "poverty line". What is necessary to satisfy basic needs varies across time and societies. Therefore, poverty lines vary in time and place, and each country uses lines which are appropriate to its level of development, societal norms and values. Information on consumption and income is obtained through sample surveys, with which households are asked to answer detailed questions on their spending habits and sources of income. Such surveys are conducted more or less regularly in most countries. These sample survey data collection methods are increasingly being complemented by participatory methods, where people are asked what their basic needs are and what poverty means for them. Interestingly, new research shows a high degree of concordance between poverty lines based on objective and subjective assessments of needs. For details on methodology, see the Measuring Poverty topic in the Poverty Analysis site. For data see Data and Data Sources. Measuring poverty at the global level When estimating poverty worldwide, the same reference poverty line has to be used, and expressed in a common unit across countries. Therefore, for the purpose of global aggregation and comparison, the World Bank uses reference lines set at $1 and $2 per day (more precisely $1.08 and $2.15 in 1993 Purchasing Power Parity terms). It has been estimated that in 2001, 1.1 billion people had consumption levels below $1 a day and 2.7 billion lived on less than $2 a day. These figures are lower than earlier estimates, indicating that some progress has taken place, but they still remain too high in terms of human suffering, and much more remains to be done. The Global Poverty Monitoring Database, by Chen and Ravallion at the World Bank contains global and regional poverty estimates for the years 1981, 1984, 1987, 1990, 1993, 1996, 1999 and 2001 as well as data on the share of people living below the national poverty line by country for the years when household surveys are available. The methodology used for the Global Poverty Monitoring Database is explained by Ravallion and Chen in "How did the world's poorest fare in the 1990s?" (2000) . For new estimates, see their paper "How Have the World's Poorest Fared Since the Early 1980s? " (2004)(232Kb PDF). Recent years have witnessed a lively debate on global poverty measurement. For more information go to The Global Poverty Numbers Debate. Jack Parkinson From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 13 03:48:59 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:48:59 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511121900.jACJ09e30231@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: "John K Clark" > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > France) > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c at MyComputer> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > "BillK" > >> Do you appreciate that Walmart is the biggest enemy that America has? > > I have been on this list for about 10 years and I believe the above remark > is the single stupidest statement I have ever seen here... It's all a matter of perception. If it is true (as is widely reported) that half of Wal-Marts workers live below the US poverty line and cannot afford basic health care - then this surely places a huge burden on society (and is breeding dissent for future trouble) - and the only balancing beneficiaries are the Walton family. If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better off in overall terms? There would be better job opportunities (a lot more choice), better wages, more wealth in circulation, more opportunities to start and run a small business - and consumers would have more choice as to where they spent their money... Jack Parkinson From mail at harveynewstrom.com Sun Nov 13 03:56:58 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:56:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <20051113023555.95441.qmail@web60020.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051113023555.95441.qmail@web60020.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9bd2596179d18007684f681d8c4c7853@HarveyNewstrom.com> On Nov 12, 2005, at 9:35 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > --- Harvey Newstrom wrote: >> Your ending point is: "resulting in rejuvenated bone >> marrow" > > No, this is not the ending point. You misunderstand > in thinking so. This is **your** restatement of my > starting point, which you have, on your own > initiative, plunked down at this point and attributed > to me as a repetition of my starting point and a > circularity of reasoning. YOU did this, > misunderstanding me. I did not. OK. So I "misread" the following part of your posting: > can I rejuvenate or "super-rejuvenate" my bone marrow > progenitor cell repair/mainteneance capability[....] as asking if you could rejuvenate or "super-rejuvenate" your bone marrow progenitor cell repair/maintenance capability[...]. It is not as unreasonable reading as you suggest! > Harvey, you're an exceedingly bright fellow and not > usually this obtuse. Is something else going on? > Have I annoyed you? Nothing else is going on. You didn't annoy me until this suggestion. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From megao at sasktel.net Sun Nov 13 04:25:22 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:25:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation In-Reply-To: <9bd2596179d18007684f681d8c4c7853@HarveyNewstrom.com> References: <20051113023555.95441.qmail@web60020.mail.yahoo.com> <9bd2596179d18007684f681d8c4c7853@HarveyNewstrom.com> Message-ID: <4376C032.9020001@sasktel.net> That scenario is one of the more doable ways to introduce steady-state evolution. The biological cycle of humans today is more like the big bang universe. What it will take to convert a big bang universe into an ongoing steady state one is the task at hand , so to speak. Modification of individual genes or structures like mitochondria utilizing an organ that can be removed and replaced like bone marrow is a good way to test out the baby steps that will lead to more grandiose schemes. The ability to create an evolutionary process that acts as a life boat to other systems does not require the dramatic advances that would be needed to make advanced whole body therapeutic regeneration a workable possibility. For someone like me who is 50, I'd like to see the real but simple over the dramatic. From a selfish point of view, I'd like to bootstrap nutritional augmentation for 15 more years but have some kind of realistic expectation that such a technique as bone marrow based systemic modification be available. Perhaps that might get me another 15 years, at which time I would be in need of something more dramatic. Without the bridge, it does not reall matter if the dramatic is available in 40 years as I may be a lost biological cause by then. It's all relative to where you are on the depreciation schedule to determine if there will be a rebuild or if you will be written off and go to the wrecking/recycling yard. MFJ From megao at sasktel.net Sun Nov 13 04:38:56 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:56 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511121900.jACJ09e30231@tick.javien.com> <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <4376C360.9030407@sasktel.net> Walmart is just like any other business going to go through a business cycle. Just because Msoft and Walmart are huge is no guarantee that they will dominate forever. In agriculture, we see a cyclical birthing and death of business. Bigger and bigger does continue, but at the end of every full expansion is a paradigm shift... I'd be surprised if even Msoft and walmart can insulate themselves from this forever. This discussion is perhaps part of the larger process that will lead to that correction over time. Those who manage Walmart might accidentally watch Southpark too , don't you suppose. > It's all a matter of perception. If it is true (as is widely reported) > that half of Wal-Marts workers live below the US poverty line and > cannot afford basic health care - then this surely places a huge > burden on society (and is breeding dissent for future trouble) - and > the only balancing beneficiaries are the Walton family. > > If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller > independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, > and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better off in > overall terms? > > There would be better job opportunities (a lot more choice), better > wages, more wealth in circulation, more opportunities to start and > run a small business - and consumers would have more choice as to > where they spent their money... From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 13 05:38:24 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 00:38:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> "BillK" > Who's Lyndon Larouche? I've never heard of him. Well that's a pity because you quoted from him extensively, and I think you should know a little something about a webpage before you recommend it to the list. Lyndon Larouche is an ex-convict and anti- Semite and possibly the biggest crackpot on the planet. Mr. Larouche thinks that Wal-Mart is the biggest enemy that America has, he also thinks Queen Elizabeth II of England promotes Satanism and is the biggest drug lord in the world. He thinks the Queen uses the money from crack sales to finance genocide in the third world by endorsing feminist and homosexual groups and abortion clinics. And believe it or not Mr. Larouche thinks Queen Elizabeth II of England uses the rest of her money to promote "the rock and roll counterculture". I am not kidding. Oh and Walter Mondale is a KGB agent, and Wal-Mart is the biggest enemy that America has.. sorry I already mentioned that one, and we should use H bombs in the mid east, and the space colony advocates in the old L5 society were devil worshipers, and Aldous Huxley wrote his books on orders from the Queen to corrupt America through "Asian religions" and .... > But apart from him, there are many Walmart critics, websites, blogs No shit Sherlock. Wal-Mart is big, and you can always find some jackass on the net blasting something that is famous, rich, or big; but I'll let you in on a little secret, not everything on the internet is true. > Do some googling Read some books. > Here is a Dems report on Walmart's low wages for example [blah blah blah] I want you to listen very carefully, it's really not that complicated, if you think Wal-Mart's wages are too low THEN DON'T WORK THERE. > And there is still the problem of much of USA production being moved > overseas WHAT?!! Make up your mind, one second you're weeping that rich countries don't help the poor the next you want jobs in poor countries sent to rich America. John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 13 05:52:33 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:52:33 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> <002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:38 AM 11/13/2005 -0500, Pelagius wrote: >>Here is a Dems report on Walmart's low wages for example [blah blah blah] > >I want you to listen very carefully, it's really not that complicated, if >you think Wal-Mart's wages are too low THEN DON'T WORK THERE. Since Bill's argument is that Wal-Mart are engaged in a drastic and ruinous Tragedy of the Commons, I think the key would be, rather: DON'T BUY THERE. Or if you do, suck up the guilt along with the savings. Damien Broderick From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 13 06:03:12 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:03:12 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) French claim Paris riots more cultured than American riots Message-ID: <4376D720.9050606@mindspring.com> Barry Williams wrote: >A very perceptive piece about recent events. Giving Barry the benefit of the doubt here and assuming he meant that ironically. I'm pretty sure this is a satire site. >>www.chaser.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2859&Itemid=26 Ze rioters, zey are swept up in ze overwhelming existential ennui of a cold, uncaring universe zat crushes ze soul, non? >French authorities have been reluctant to send in troops to quell >the protests, insisting that a military presence will only be >legitimate with UN backing. Bringing the riots under control has >been dismissed as "Anglo-Saxon policing" by members of the >Government. "We do not want to relinquish our proud French >traditions just because they cause mass civil unrest," said Social >Affairs Minister Jean-Louis Borloo. "We will not trade in racism, >mass unemployment and arrogant timidity in policing for a >"McCulture" of law and order." Looks like there's no alternative, they're just gonna have to resort to a proud French tradition: surrender. Dave Palmer -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 13 06:37:24 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 01:37:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <004b01c5e81c$bf57fc70$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Me: >> I want you to listen very carefully, it's really not that complicated, if >> you think Wal-Mart's wages are too low THEN DON'T WORK THERE. "Damien Broderick" > I think the key would be, rather: DON'T BUY THERE. Yes, that's fine advice, if you think Wal-Mart is evil then shop at the little mom and pop store that overcharges the hell out of you. However I'll bet that's not what they do, I'll bet after a hard day's work writing anti corporate screeds most blog writers instead go to Wal-Mart for a six pack, a pack of Marlboros, and most important of all, a comic book. John K Clark From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 13 06:51:45 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:51:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <004b01c5e81c$bf57fc70$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200511130651.jAD6pQe06934@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John K Clark ... > >> I want you to listen very carefully, it's really not that complicated, if > >> you think Wal-Mart's wages are too low THEN DON'T WORK THERE. > > "Damien Broderick" > > > I think the key would be, rather: DON'T BUY THERE... It's a moral paradox. If one is poor, then clearly it is OK to shop at Walmart. What if one isn't destitute, but isn't rolling in it either? How well-funded can one be before shopping at Wallyworld should produce guilt? Then what about Salvation Army? Clothing and other stuff there was donated for the poor, but SA has to sell the stuff that will sell in order to raise money for the poor. So if one is not poor, is it OK to buy stuff there? By doing so, one helps the Salvation Army raise money for the poor, and that is good, but it also removes articles that could be purchased by people less fortunate, which is bad, but it also frees up shelf space for more donated merchandise, which can be used to display more donated stuff for sale, good. Suggestions welcome. spike From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 13 07:15:24 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:15:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <007501c5e822$1f099160$6f064e0c@MyComputer> "Jack Parkinson" > If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller > independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, > and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better > off in overall terms? NO! I rather doubt that Billy Bobs Pretty Good Hardware Store or any of the thousands of other stores in your hypothetical could match Wal-Mart's legendary hyper efficiency; most economists agree that Wal-Mart can take credit for a big chunk of the productivity growth America had the good fortune to receive over the last 10 years, and productivity is the name of the game, it is the generator of wealth. So in your world the pool of people wanting a job would be the same but there would be less money available to pay their salary. And consumers would be paying far more than they should for goods. That's not a world I want to live in. John K Clark From eugen at leitl.org Sun Nov 13 07:23:42 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:23:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051113072342.GT2249@leitl.org> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 06:08:34PM -0800, spike wrote: > If production is done by nanotech miracle factories, > the result is exactly the same as offshoring, is it It is nothing like offshoring, provided most individuals directly own the nanofabs. Problem with today's production is centralism (large scale facilities offer better economies) and specialization -- things degrade quickly is a place loses competitiveness. Scarcity still exists with nanofabs, but it only concerns luxuries and weapons (even if anyone on the block could fab a nuke they probably shouldn't be allowed to, at least given current humanity). > not? Yet we don't dread that at all, we fondly > anticipate it. We would need to come up with a > new name for manufacturing jobs lost to nanotech. > Downsourcing? In-shoring? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From eugen at leitl.org Sun Nov 13 07:33:10 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:33:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> <010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> <002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051113073310.GW2249@leitl.org> On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 11:52:33PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > Since Bill's argument is that Wal-Mart are engaged in a drastic and ruinous > Tragedy of the Commons, I think the key would be, rather: DON'T BUY THERE. > Or if you do, suck up the guilt along with the savings. Why? I'm free to graze my cattle wherever I want. If I don't graze them on the commons, somebody else will. Which tragedy? The grass is lush and green. The future? Which future? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 07:37:56 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:37:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <20051113073756.20973.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jack Parkinson wrote: > It's all a matter of perception. If it is true (as > is widely reported) that > half of Wal-Marts workers live below the US poverty > line and cannot afford > basic health care - then this surely places a huge > burden on society (and is > breeding dissent for future trouble) - and the only > balancing beneficiaries > are the Walton family. It is absolutely true. Wal-Mart is to free market capitalism what Jimmy Hoffa was to labor unions. That is to say that they are the festering exception that invalidates the rule, turning what is good and beautiful into something ugly and attrocious. The Walton family are corrupt robber barons in every sense of the word with absolutely no sense of noblesse oblige or altruistic philanthropy. Bill Gates and MSFT are saints and angels compared to these low lifes. Almost all their philanthropy is self-serving, consisting of donations to right-wing partisan causes such as the destruction of the public education system here in the U.S. to be replaced with a string of private schools called Tesseract Group Inc which they essentially own. The rest seems to go to the GOP and candidates such as Bush that will cut their taxes. Yet here is where the hypocrisy of their greed comes to light. Despite their never ending crusade against public education, taxes, and government assisitance, they are the "welfare queens" of corporate America sucking down some $1.008 billion USD in government subsidies ranging from land development subsidies to general grant monies. All this is paid for by you and me and other "honest" tax-payers. http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/wmtstudy.pdf On top of this, while they beggar their own employees, they simultaneously encourage them to seek government assistance to make up the difference in a livable wage. http://www.blackcommentator.com/78/78_cover_unions.html Relevant quote -------------------------------- "Wal-Mart can also teach its acolytes how to profit from poverty. Although the Walton family spends millions on rightwing causes to undermine what?s left of the social safety net, their corporation urges employees to apply for every available government assistance. According to a report prepared by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, federal taxpayers subsidize the typical, 200-employee Wal-Mart store at the rate of $420,750 a year. Rep. George Miller charges Wal-Mart is the source of "downward spirals in communities." ------------------- It is almost as if they are waging socioeconomic genocide on the poor by- 1. Not paying them enough to live on. 2. Encouraging them to go on welfare. 3. Funding political candidates to cut welfare programs. 4. Competing with the poor for government money through their inexcusable use of corporate welfare programs such as land development subsidies. 5. Actively trying to eliminate public education in this country to curtail any opportunity for the poor to get a better job than Walmart greeter in this country. So next time YOU are fooled into thinking you are saving a few bucks by shopping at Wal-mart, remember that they are more than cancelling out your savings with all that tax money of yours that they are greedily stuffing into their pockets, behind your back. > > If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several > thousand smaller > independent stores, all paying their employees a > decent living wage, and all > competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be > better off in overall > terms? Of course it would be. That's like asking if an ecosystem would be healthier if it had more than a single species. Or whether your children would be better off if you had a larger pool than one person from which to select your mate. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Nov 13 07:43:18 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:43:18 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <01bb01c5e825$e9ddfa40$8998e03c@homepc> John K Clark wrote: > "The Avantguardian" > >> Would YOU do the job for 7 cents an hour? > > If I was currently making 6 cents an hour I would not only take > the job I'd be dancing in the street with happiness at receiving > a 15% rise, or I would be if I wasn't too weak from hunger to > do so. > > > you are treating others WORSE than you yourself >> would want to be treated. > > Yes that's true, your happiness is important but not as important > as my happiness. This pretty much sums it up doesn't it. Brett Paatsch From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 07:44:08 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:44:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511130651.jAD6pQe06934@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051113074408.21826.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> --- spike wrote: > > It's a moral paradox. If one is poor, then clearly > it is OK to shop at Walmart. What if one isn't > destitute, but isn't rolling in it either? How > well-funded can one be before shopping at Wallyworld > > should produce guilt? No it is NOT OK for poor people to shop at Wal-mart. Wal-mart is a lie. They subsidize their discounts with TAX MONEY that poor people pay as well. In the end, the poor are shooting themselves in the foot by shopping at Wal-mart. It's like the peasant thanking the feudal lord for not taking ALL the grain that the peasant grew. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 13 08:02:14 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:02:14 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511121900.jACJ09e30231@tick.javien.com> <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <006a01c5e821$dfc5e3a0$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <00bb01c5e828$996a65f0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> From: "John K Clark" To: "Jack Parkinson" Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 3:13 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > "Jack Parkinson" > > > If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller > > independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, > > and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better > > off in overall terms? > > NO! I rather doubt that Billy Bobs Pretty Good Hardware Store or any of the > thousands of other stores in your hypothetical could match Wal-Mart's > legendary hyper efficiency; most economists agree that Wal-Mart can take > credit for a big chunk of the productivity growth America had the good > fortune to receive over the last 10 years, and productivity is the name of > the game, it is the generator of wealth. So in your world the pool of people > wanting a job would be the same but there would be less money available to > pay their salary. And consumers would be paying far more than they should > for goods. That's not a world I want to live in. > > John K Clark Your remarks do not really make sense. 1) Thousands of stores competing would make for a pretty efficient market system. Yes? 2) Where is the wealth that is being generated if more than 100,000 Wal-Mart employees are living in poverty? 3) And if your answer is: in the Walton Family vaults - how is that useful to America? 4) And if all that wealth was in distributed use across a broad range of businesses competing for labor in a free market - surely there would be more money available to pay the pool of workers? 5) How does increased productivity benefit America if it comes at a cost of increased unemployment and (in today's news here from CNN) 35 million plus American citizens living below the poverty line? Jack Parkinson From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Nov 13 08:07:11 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:07:11 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051112023633.28055.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><001f01c5e7a4$a98f22b0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><010801c5e7b0$de71afa0$d6054e0c@MyComputer><002801c5e814$914d4f40$6f064e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051112235009.01e53ea0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <007501c5e822$1f099160$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <01ed01c5e829$3ff45ed0$8998e03c@homepc> John K Clark wrote: > "Jack Parkinson" > >> If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller >> independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, >> and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better >> off in overall terms? > > NO! I rather doubt that Billy Bobs Pretty Good Hardware Store or any of > the > thousands of other stores in your hypothetical could match Wal-Mart's > legendary hyper efficiency; most economists agree that Wal-Mart can take > credit for a big chunk of the productivity growth America had the good > fortune to receive over the last 10 years, and productivity is the name of > the game, it is the generator of wealth. Which Americans shared in that wealth? Is there reputable economic figures for an improvement in living standards being enjoyed by more than 50 per cent of Americans? Brett Paatsch From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 13 08:12:52 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 03:12:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113073756.20973.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00cf01c5e82a$17361d20$6f064e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > The Walton family are corrupt robber barons in every sense of the word > with absolutely no sense of noblesse oblige or altruistic philanthropy. Mr. Avantguardian sir, it pains me to say this but....., you are full of shit. I estimate that Sam Walton did more to elevate the average global level of happiness on this planet in 4.2 seconds than you did in your entire life. John K Clark From megao at sasktel.net Sun Nov 13 10:28:47 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:28:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <00cf01c5e82a$17361d20$6f064e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113073756.20973.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> <00cf01c5e82a$17361d20$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4377155F.7080006@sasktel.net> What must be remembered is that from a government perspective the consolidation has a second side. It is easier and more efficient for government to regulate and tax a single conglomerate at will and more acceptable for the population to see it done than if there were 100,000 small retail businesses with families and communities to deal with. Yes there has been a social price to create Walmart but that can be changed at any time so long as the law has the means to be act and the citizenry have the majority will to demand. Their business model is not at fault, just the ethical nature of some of their business practices. Enron and Worldcom went too far and were put down. Wal mart must always remember that there is a line beyond which society will not tolerate monopoly. Remember Ma Bell. I'm still sad that Enron went down from the perspective that they could deliver mega projects. Just before Enron went down they had 4 billion dollars planned for limited partnership wind farms for North Dakota. The projects will eventually be done but it will take 10 extra years for the small projects to add up to the same thing as Enron could do with one corporate resolution. So I hope that the management of Walmart does heed the public view that they are nearly a social pariah before serendipity strikes and they meet the fate of Worldcom. MFJ > "The Avantguardian" > >> The Walton family are corrupt robber barons in every sense of the word >> with absolutely no sense of noblesse oblige or altruistic philanthropy. > > > Mr. Avantguardian sir, it pains me to say this but....., you are full of > shit. I estimate that Sam Walton did more to elevate the average global > level of happiness on this planet in 4.2 seconds than you did in your > entire > life. > From benboc at lineone.net Sun Nov 13 10:36:50 2005 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:36:50 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Monsanto's genetically-modified revival In-Reply-To: <200511121742.jACHg5e22784@tick.javien.com> References: <200511121742.jACHg5e22784@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <43771742.90905@lineone.net> > Monsanto only sells its GM seeds if farmers sign a contract, similar to a software end-user license Interesting. Makes me wonder what a GM Open-Source movement would be like. On the face of it, it would seem a non-starter, but i wonder... ben From benboc at lineone.net Sun Nov 13 10:46:55 2005 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:46:55 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:PARTY TODAY! Austin, Texas Saturday 11/12/05 In-Reply-To: <200511121742.jACHg5e22784@tick.javien.com> References: <200511121742.jACHg5e22784@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4377199F.7040806@lineone.net> Good party? I hope you had liquid-nitrogen ice-cream. Apparently it's the best sort. ben From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 11:01:47 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 03:01:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <004b01c5e81c$bf57fc70$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051113110147.4942.qmail@web60016.mail.yahoo.com> Oh, look. Is that a soap box? Somebody wrote if you don't like Wal-Mart, don't work there. Then "Damien Broderick" wrote: > > I think the key would be, rather: DON'T BUY THERE. Then --- John K Clark wrote: > Yes, that's fine advice, if you think Wal-Mart is > evil then shop at the > little mom and pop store that overcharges the hell > out of you. I have yet another suggestion: If you don't like Wal-Mart, vote for a government which will restructure campaign finance so that the wealthy --individuals and corporations -- can't, in effect, buy the damn govt with campaign contributions. Then there might be a chance of having a govt which enforces a social contract with a core belief in the right of every Joe and Jane to a minimum standard of living -- vigorous support of gainful employment, food, housing, health care, education. The govt would support such a social contract not because it's a warm and fuzzy govt, but because the vast majority of citizens, being just such Joes and Janes who hold just such beliefs, would vote any govt out onto the street which does what our current govts do -- pay lip service to the Joes and Janes while setting up a system to enable the wealthy to suck the life out of anyone on the planet not rich enough to protect themself. Some people might call that socialism, and do so with warmth and an approving smile. Others, let's call them the spiritually challenged (unevolved? disadvantaged?), would call it socialism, with a snarl and a rictus of contempt, objecting to any interference with that aspect of their fantasy life wherein they gleefully and voraciously suck the life out of the far flung multitudes. Sadly for the multitudes, any dismay on the part of these evildoers will be at best fleeting, because a better, more just world is the fantasy, and the feasting of capitalists the reality. Have a nice day. Shop at Wal-Mart. Be glad you don't have work there,...yet. Best, Jeff Davis "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do." - Samuel P. Huntington __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From bjk at imminst.org Sun Nov 13 06:29:31 2005 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:29:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst.org Conference Success Message-ID: <56e7a090817855462f32ae8814e05dd3@www.imminst.org> Conference Success! More than 150 people attended the first Immortality Institute Life Extension Conference in Atlanta, GA on Nov 5, 2005. There were a number of media and film teams covering the event. ImmInst has planned a DVD of the even to be available soon. Pictures of the conference are found here: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=191&t=8443 Speakers power points (13) are found here: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=SF&f=191 Randy Wicker(ImmInst Advisor) has some conference video here: http://www.randywickerreporting.blogspot.com/ Thanks again to the wonderful audience, excellent speakers, and hard working volunteers. Extended listing of "Thank Yous" here: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=191&t=8486 Thanks again to our Conference Sponsors: $5,000 Gold Sponsor - Brian Cartmell, Cartmell Holdings LLC $4,000 Dinner Sponsor - Life Extension Foundation $3,000 Silver Sponsor - Gary C. Hudson, CEO, HMX Inc. $2,000 Bronze Sponsor - Canaca.com, Web Hosting $1,000 Patron Sponsor - Alcor Life Extension Foundation FREE COPY OF IMMINST FILM If you'd like to receive a beta-version copy of ImmInst's documentary film, Exploring Life Extension (1hr 45min), reply to this email or send an email with your physical mailing address to support at imminst.org Sincerely, ImmInst Team Please Paste following link to Un-subscribe : http://www.imminst.org/maillist/unsubscribe.php?mail=Extropy-chat at extropy.org&id=2 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 11:58:43 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 12:58:43 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Monsanto's genetically-modified revival In-Reply-To: <43771742.90905@lineone.net> References: <200511121742.jACHg5e22784@tick.javien.com> <43771742.90905@lineone.net> Message-ID: <4902d9990511130358m548b7ed2p7ac0fb00db22d403@mail.gmail.com> On 11/13/05, ben wrote: > > > Monsanto only sells its GM seeds if farmers sign a contract, similar > to a software end-user license > > > Interesting. Makes me wonder what a GM Open-Source movement would be > like. On the face of it, it would seem a non-starter, but i wonder... It would be even more interesting if the Monsanto contract was similar to software EULAs, that are presented AFTER the purchase is made and are therefore invalid. Some kind of leaflet hidden among the seeds? Alfio From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 13 12:16:43 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:16:43 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511131102.jADB2He00987@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <005901c5e84c$1ee30480$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > "spike" said: > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > France) > To: "'ExI chat list'" > Message-ID: <200511130208.jAD28He08413 at tick.javien.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK > ... >> Production jobs being moved overseas to low wage economies is still a >> problem, no matter the credentials of the person pointing it out. BillK > > If production is done by nanotech miracle factories, > the result is exactly the same as offshoring, is it > not? Yet we don't dread that at all, we fondly > anticipate it. We would need to come up with a > new name for manufacturing jobs lost to nanotech. > Downsourcing? In-shoring? > > spike There is at least a potentially big difference between NMT and off-shore manufacture... The politics of the situation would determine the extent of the difference. By way of illustration, I would think the 'new name' you mention would depend a lot on the cost of nano-production to the end-user. We might call it 'price-gouging' if the means of production was limited to an elite few. We might call it 'a new era of accessible consumer goods' if the technology was widely available. And we might call it 'a miracle' - if it was open to all... If it WAS open to all - then no-one should lose. Everyone would have access to whatever they wanted or needed. OK, huge corporations might curl up and die - but even their constituent stockholders and management would have no cause for complaint if their lifestyles were not threatened - and were even perhaps further enhanced by a manufacturing technology operable at individual/household level. Jack Parkinson From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 13 12:25:27 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:25:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <00cf01c5e82a$17361d20$6f064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > Mr. Avantguardian sir, it pains me to say this > but....., you are full of > shit. I am glad it pains one of us, John. Perhaps I am full of shit but I prefer calling it conscience. But what good does it do me? You may be right, I should trade it in for some cheap knick-nacks from China. > I estimate that Sam Walton did more to elevate > the average global > level of happiness on this planet in 4.2 seconds > than you did in your entire > life. Do you measure your happiness in the saving of a few pennies here and there? Or did you mean the 4.2 seconds it took for his death rattle to issue forth from his dying lips? Those 4.2 seconds sure made his ungrateful kids happy. It may have given the numerous competitors that he bankrupted over the course of his life a brief moment of satisfaction. And I am sure it gave some passing joy to all the employees that he fired to avoid promoting. Of course, MY life has yet to run its course. You are correct in guessing that I will probably never be as rich as Sam Walton was but in some ways I consider my calling to be somewhat higher than that of a penny pinching merchant. And I can assure you that Sam Walton never saw the sublime beauty of a lymphocyte on the prowl for a cancer cell. You must be a very powerful psychic indeed to see so far into the past and the future and be able to so thouroughly weigh the lives of two men from different times that you have never met. Then again, in the eyes of one accustomed to instant gratification, even dead maple trees look far grander than acorns do they not? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 13 12:57:00 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:57:00 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511131102.jADB2He00987@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <006e01c5e851$c0385740$0201a8c0@JPAcer> "John K Clark" wrote: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) "The Avantguardian" said: >> The Walton family are corrupt robber barons in every sense of the word >> with absolutely no sense of noblesse oblige or altruistic philanthropy. >Mr. Avantguardian sir, it pains me to say this but....., you are full of >shit. I estimate that Sam Walton did more to elevate the average global >level of happiness on this planet in 4.2 seconds than you did in your >entire >life. > John K Clark Stuart's argument on Wal Mart had the "three r's." It was was researched, rational and referenced. Your response does not address the points he raised, does makes a glib subjective judgement and relies on derogation and emotive language rather than facts in rebuttal. I take it that you are finding your position on this issue indefensible? Jack Parkinson From pbreyer at t-online.de Sun Nov 13 13:03:08 2005 From: pbreyer at t-online.de (Peter Breyer) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:03:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Monsanto's genetically-modified revival Message-ID: <000001c5e852$9838d1b0$d46eab54@prometheus> Alfio Puglisi: > Interesting. Makes me wonder what a GM Open-Source movement would be > like. On the face of it, it would seem a non-starter, but i wonder... Sure, the entry-level requirements for serious bio research are higher than for programming a P2P client, but still, such an open-source biology already exists. Look here: http://www.cambia.org/daisy/cambia/563.html "BiOS (Biological Open Source) Licenses draw inspiration from the open source software movement but are adapted for patented technologies. They create a "protected commons" in which an invention can be improved by the ideas of many, without exclusive capture by any one entity. CAMBIA has seeded this movement with its own technologies (see below), and other technology owners may also provide licenses to their technologies using this framework." ...and a Wired article on BIOS: Open-Source Biology Evolves By David Cohn Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,66289,00.html 02:00 AM Jan. 17, 2005 PT To push research forward, scientists need to draw from the best data and innovations in their field. Much of the work, however, is patented, leaving many academic and nonprofit researchers hamstrung. But an Australian organization advocating an open-source approach to biology hopes to free up biological data without violating intellectual property rights. The battle lies between biotech companies like multinational Monsanto, who can grant or deny the legal use of biological information, and independent organizations like The Biological Innovation for Open Society, or BIOS, and Science Commons. The indies want to give scientists free access to the latest methods in biotechnology through the web. BIOS will soon launch an open-source platform that promises to free up rights to patented DNA sequences and the methods needed to manipulate biological material. Users must only follow BIOS' "rules of engagement," which are similar to those used by the open-source software community. "There are technologies you need to innovate and then there are the innovations themselves," said Richard Jefferson, founder and director of BIOS in Canberra, Australia. "But those can only happen when there is fair access to the technologies." Just like open-source software, open-source biology users own the patents to their creations, but cannot hinder others from using the original shared information to develop similar products. Any improvements of the shared methods of BIOS, the Science Commons or other open-source communities must be made public, as well as any health hazards that are discovered. BIOS has called on Brian Behlendorf, CTO of ColabNet, to create the web tools the open-source community platform will run on. Those should be up in the coming weeks. Nipping at its heels is the Science Commons. The outgrowth project of Creative Commons will have a hand in all areas of science, not just the life sciences like BIOS, and is getting ready to launch its open-source community in the next two to three weeks, said John Wilbanks, executive director of Science Commons. Wilbanks sees Science Commons and other open-source communities as a "neutral ground" for people to decide how much control over a patent they want to maintain or control. "Say you are a holder of patents and you want to make them available, you should be able to do that without having to call a lawyer," said Wilbanks. While free access to biological information will benefit those doing research, companies who have invested millions in patents, on the other hand, won't perform expensive groundbreaking research without a guarantee that their intellectual property rights would be upheld. "Patents attract investors, providing the resources necessary to bring the product to market," said Brigid Quinn, deputy director of public affairs with the U.S. patent office. "Patents are and have always been an important part of this country's economic fabric." On the contrary, Jefferson believes patent restrictions have compromised billions of people who should be benefiting from new diagnostic tests or improved genetically modified crops and medicines. For example, biologists in Kenya might be eager to create a genetically modified sweet potato that could allow farmers to use fewer chemical fertilizers. But if a company owns all or part of the gene sequence, DNA fragment or the mechanism in question, the scientists' hands are tied unless they can pay a licensing fee. The corporations that own such patents won't invest in research unless they know a market is waiting for the product. "Perhaps professors in Kenya can start a company, perhaps they can make $300,000 a year, but that's just not on the charts for Monsanto," said Roger Brent of Berkeley's Molecular Sciences Institute. Under an open-source contract between scientists, just like open-source software, developers would be free to use these methods to create new products. The products themselves would be proprietary, but the techniques and components used to make them would be open to all, meaning more bio-products, competition, smaller markets and faster improvements, Jefferson said. If Jefferson and his fellow rebel scientists succeed, biotech companies stand to lose their monopoly on creating integrated biological systems. But he believes human health, safety and standards of living will all suffer under the present patent structure. Some fear that making the latest methods of genetic modification public will provide terrorists with the know-how to concoct new bioweapons in the comfort of their own garage. "Biological knowledge can be used for good or ill and unfortunately it's easier to make a biological weapon than it is defenses," said David Seagrest, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies who focuses on biology and terrorism. With free instructions on how to cook up new, improved toxins, open-source biology could pose a threat to homeland security. Jefferson, however, distinguishes between having access to biotech components and the legal license to use them. The techniques for biohacking are already public -- they can be found in IP contracts -- it's just not legal to apply them. "The people who have malice are going to do it irrespective of whether or not it's legal," said Jefferson. Brent and Drew Endy, assistant professor of biology at MIT, who first coined the phrase "open source biology" at Berkeley's MSI, echoed this distinction. "Right now anybody who wants can re-synthesize the SARS virus," explained Brent. Brent, Endy and researcher Robert Carlson sounded a rallying cry for open-source biology at MSI in 1999. The idea was to give researchers and scientists free access to the information needed to invent new biotech products that could benefit their communities and keep the world safe. Five years later the dream of open-source software is becoming a reality. "This is just the kernel of open-source biology," Jefferson said. Jefferson sees open-source biology as part of science's evolution, the next logical step for science after the open access movement, in which organizations like the Public Library of Science made scientific journals freely available to anyone on the internet. Previously, thousands of dollars were charged annually for subscriptions by journals like Nature and Science. Now people will be able to perform the same experiments found in these free online journals and become part of the peer review and research process themselves. By broadening the base of people who could hack DNA, scientists like Brent, Endy and Jefferson believe the hacker culture values like elegant design, creativity and sharing beneficial works of engineering for all, will spread to biology. "I think those are virtues which the existing world of science and engineering could gain a lot from," Brent said. From amara at amara.com Sun Nov 13 16:05:42 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:05:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] (not-so) Stupid Comics Message-ID: Stupid Comics http://www.misterkitty.org/extras/stupidcovers/index.html These comics are hilarious -- and relevant to this group, as here in satirical form is a good example of a 1950s meme still running around today illustrating the ever-present fear of some people towards science. Amara ------------------------------------------------------------- (from the commentary) "But there are lots of other spirit-filled folk out there toiling away at the drawing table trying to get people to come home to Jesus. One of the more interesting is this anonymous gem of the "cheesecake" school of saving souls, FORBIDDEN PLANET. [...] That's right, it's a Christian interpretation of the classic 50s sci-fi flick starring Leslie Nielsen and a guy in a robot suit. But what makes this tract special is the slick, commerical artwork that prominently features good lookin' babes." (from the comic) "So this was a movie with a meaning about how science had learned to recreate the thoughts of your own mind and cause them to materilise. But they began to create evil images and monsters and demons and this big one in particular that was going around causing destruction, killing people, and finally almost killed the professor himself. And it seemed to hint that the higher civilisation that had existed on the planet before had done the same thing and had used these monsters at first to protect them from other invaders and so on, but finally they turned on them and wiped them all out! So the moral is that the evil imaginations of evil minds can be recreated by science and have been today. So that now science, like the scientist on that planet, has created a monster that looks like it's about to destroy them -- the Atomic Bom! -- The atomic monster that has come out of the evil imaginations of their evil minds by the power of the Devil, really spiritual power." ------------------------------------------------------------- I actually _liked_ The Forbidden Planet.. Robbie the Robot was cool. Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "What I find most disheartening is the thought that somewhere out there our galaxy has been deleted from somebody else's sample." -- Alec Boksenberg [on the occasion of his 60th birthday celebration] From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Nov 13 17:22:49 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:22:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> On 11/11/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > Dead cheap molecular manufacturing could end such strife - in the right > hands (that is - everyone's hands) But, if and when it arrives - it's > deliberate restriction to a privileged few could also give us strife we > never before considered even possible. > Unfortunately - I share your gloomy outlook. Cheap ubiquitous molecular manufacturing could certainly end the strife over scarcity of subsistence level resources, but only if used wisely. To put such power in everyone's hands, without first having a framework of rational interdependence, would be like providing gasoline to children playing with matches. - Jef From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 13 18:08:44 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:08:44 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Re: And Bush global climate change and Nuc? Message-ID: <4377812C.6070100@mindspring.com> On 13/11/2005, at 3:13 PM, Scott Peterson wrote: > At 07:23 PM 11/12/2005, Tony Mills wrote: > >> Agreed- If you need quickly delivered peak power- the option of choice is >> hydro- ie let water fall from a place you've already pumped it up >> to. You >> can use H2 electrolysed from water by renewable power for continious >> power, >> or you can simply pump water up a hill. But these are problems for >> about a >> decade hence when renewbles make a up a larger proportion of power >> generation. At the moment they are expensive options- but doable. I don't >> think it is too optimistic to think H2 generated by electrolysis will >> become more cost effective over that decade. > > > Yes, but I'm not talking just short term power generation. We have > peaker units today to do that, but that power often costs 10 times or > more the cost of regular power plants and they only produce a small > fraction of the total load to carry the network load until cheaper > units can come on line or the demand drops. > > I'm talking longer term for the week(s) the sun doesn't shine or the > wind it too fast or not fast enough or just doesn't blow. I just > don't see any significant amount of generating capacity being replaced > until you can find substitute power that is reliable. Biomass might, > but remains unproven in large scale deployment. It's also dependent on > availability of large amounts of fairly consistent material. Wood, > paper, cow shit or whatever. This requires long term planning and > economic coordination. > >> Which will presumably be available in 30 years at the earliest?. The >> price >> per kw of renewable energy is going down, as it is more widely deployed. >> The nuc industry has been promising safe nuc power designs for 30 years, >> without result- So I wouldn't hold my breath. > > > It could be sooner. GE and other companies have offered a number of > designs for reactors that are self limiting, much cleaner and > smaller. We know what it takes to build plants now and developing a > set of consistent set of guidelines for design and operation would be > a lot easier. > > >> Nuc power is available outside the US, and you would think 40 years >> might be >> sufficient to sort out the above problems, at least in one country - But >> even if they were fixed there are a few fundamental problems- Waste- >> millions of years of it- decommissioning- runs in to billions of $- >> then the >> decommissed reactor parts have to be stored at medium (and high) level >> repositories. > > > Seventeen percent of the worlds electricity is generated by nuclear > power. As far as waste, a large part is definitional. Most low-grade > waste is simply a product that came from a nuclear plant. Had it come > from somewhere else, it would be simple trash. The issue of fuel rods > and other high-level radiation waste is proving to be more of a > political problem. Much of that is of the NIMBY variety, but it's one > that does need to be resolved. > >> But why go nuc anyway? It is not cost competitive with renewables, >> and given >> the lowering costs of renewables, and the high fixed costs of nuc (waste >> storage, construction and decomissioning) is unlikely to ever be. > > > Main reason, biased figures. A nuclear plant or even fossil fuel > plants will reliably generate power 24/7 for months at a time. When > supplemental power costs are factored into the "renewable" plant costs > they don't look nearly as attractive. > > I'm not saying nuclear is cheap but it's also biased because of the > huge cost overruns, upgrades and regulatory costs. More standardized > regulations and plant designs should significantly reduce those costs. > > Scott Peterson You are dead right Scott, it's not peak load that is the real problem, it's base load. It takes a very large amount of energy to keep a modern society running and that energy has to have at least two fundamental attributes - it has to be economically viable and it has to be reliable, and, of course, It should also be as environmentally benign as possible. By far the vast majority of (non transportation) energy in the world is generated by plants using steam to turn turbines and thus generators. Steam requires water to be boiled, which requires a heat source, and these are many. Burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas), burning plant matter (biomass), decay of radioactive elements (nuclear), focused solar radiation via mirrors (solar thermal), using hot water from existing volcanic related sites, of pumping water through sub-surface hot rocks (geothermal). All of these have advantages AND disadvantages. most of them are reliable enough for base load production 24 hours per day; some of them are economically viable, and; none of them are totally environmentally benign (though some much more so than others). The next most common process is hydro, which still uses water but at ambient temperatures, but is constrained by various geographical (and environmental) factors such as mountains and rainfall. Then we have the non-steam/water 'renewables', wind, solar photovoltaic and tidal being the most common. None of these is reliable enough for base load production, though they (along with some of those in the steam cycle) have a useful place in the overall mix, as does better energy efficiency technologies. But they will never be the main source of the energy we need to keep functioning. As Scott so correctly pointed out, if you have too much of the unreliable renewables in the mix, you then have to keep what the power industry calls a 'spinning reserve" continuously on line (but not on load), so you don't save much (if anything) on any front. Then we get to hydrogen, which Tim seems to think is the long term solution. We all know that H is the most common element in the universe, and burning it causes no serious pollution risk - its byproduct is water (albeit water vapour is by far the most common greenhouse gas in the environment). Certainly hydrogen is common enough, but it does not exist as a resource in its natural state (not on Earth anyway), it has to be manufactured. Yes it is benign at the end use stage (just as electricity is) but at the manufacturing stage it is far from that. In the last Skeptic, I published an article on the Hydrogen Economy by an expert in the field, a former divisional chief of the CSIRO division that investigates such matters, including fuel cells. Very sobering reading for anyone who sees hydrogen as the holy grail for energy, and I would be happy to send a copy to interested people off line. Like anything else, it has its place, but a universal panacea it ain't. Taking all the factors into consideration, nuclear electricity production is probably going to come into its own in the future as the best available method with the least downside and we had better get used to it. Barry Williams the Skeptic of Oz -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 13 18:24:00 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:24:00 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113110147.4942.qmail@web60016.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006801c5e87f$6b9bcb30$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Jeff Davis" > > Have a nice day. Shop at Wal-Mart. Be glad you don't > have work there,...yet. Right-o. Wal-Mart and Milk of Human Kindness may appear together on PR-type commercials, but in real life it has been more like this (and, in looking over the long list of other lawsuits against Wal-Mart available online, one finds the stories tell a consistently dreary tale of shameful abuses): http://afl-cio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/pr04052005b.cfm Wal-Mart Sucks: http://www.poormojo.org/pmjadaily/archives/002286.html Olga From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Nov 13 18:35:56 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:35:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511130651.jAD6pQe06934@tick.javien.com> References: <004b01c5e81c$bf57fc70$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <200511130651.jAD6pQe06934@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511131035m1748c69ftf8f72e87efaf98be@mail.gmail.com> On 11/12/05, spike wrote: > > It's a moral paradox. If one is poor, then clearly > it is OK to shop at Walmart. What if one isn't > destitute, but isn't rolling in it either? How > well-funded can one be before shopping at Wallyworld > should produce guilt? > Like all paradox, it results from seeing the system at an insufficient level of context. At a higher level these pieces have to fit (and new paradox can then arise.) It's the same insufficiency of context that leads people to see the iterated prisoner's dilemma game as a paradox, that leads economists to conclude from a logical logical cost/benefit analysis that it is irrational for individuals to invest the effort necessary to go out and vote, and that leads individuals and businesses to compete to the extent that they ruin the very environment--the commons--in which they must interact. A pragmatic description of morality might be "that decision-making which promotes growth of subjective values over increasingly objective scope (of time, interactees, and types of interactions.) Extended growth of Self entails growth of Other. Ruinious competition serves no one. So, returning from the abstract and back to the question at hand, it is moral for an individual to deal with Walmart to the extent that their overall investment goes toward the kind of world they would prefer to create. - Jef From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 19:23:52 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:23:52 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: even if Arab poverty were terminated In-Reply-To: <006501c5e6c8$f9289040$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511111320.jABDKee06122@tick.javien.com> <006501c5e6c8$f9289040$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/11/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > Al Brooks said: > Subject: [extropy-chat] even if Arab poverty were terminated > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Message-ID: <20051110194714.93152.qmail at web51605.mail.yahoo.com> > > >If poverty were to be terminated in Arab nations, Arabs would still go to > >war. The koran was >written in the 7th century, so for over 1,300 years > >Arabs have beem reading advice such as to lie >in wait for infidels & > jews > >to ambush them at every opportunity. To attack the enemies of Islam is > >an > >unambiguous part of the radical Arab heritage, and though radical Arab > >nationalists constitute >only a small fraction of Arabs, sympathy for > >radicals is not inconsiderable. > >Of course ending poverty wouldn't hurt at all, but you can see in Western > >nations that >fundamentalist xians and orthodox jews becoming wealthy > does > >not substantially alter their >extreme religious views. > > I find the timescale quite interesting. Islam is in its 13th century. What > was Christianity doing in that period? Militant crusades, repression with > extreme violence and laying the groundwork for the inquisition. > Becoming wealthy does not alter the views of extreme pro-lifers now > either. > > Plus, it's taken us some 300yrs to pull the teeth of Xianity to the point where one can dissent openly and not be burned. The job hasn't even begun with Islam. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 13 20:50:07 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:50:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > Do you measure your happiness in the saving of a few > pennies here and there? Yes, that is one of the keys of Sam Walton's success, money is the way to keep score, it lets you know if you're wining or losing the war on poverty. But I was thinking more of the formation of all those third world sweatshops he encouraged; they saved far more people from starvation than Mother Theresa ever did, and they lifted others (like in South Korea and Formosa and Singapore and a few hundred million in China) from a life of degradation to the middle class. > I will probably never be as rich as Sam Walton was but in some ways I > consider my calling to be somewhat higher than that of a penny > pinching merchant. And I can assure you that Sam Walton never > saw the sublime beauty of a lymphocyte on the prowl for a cancer cell. How poetic, how moving, how mystical, how brainless. Sam Walton gave the poor a way to climb out of poverty, you offer them nothing but your tears. > Perhaps I am full of shit but I prefer calling it conscience. Do me a favor and honestly ask yourself one question, what is really your top priority in this matter? Is it solving the problem of world poverty or is it showing off to the world what a caring empathetic man you are? No need to tell me your answer because I don't need to be a psychic to know what you will say, but tell yourself the truth. And don't worry, I won't hear. John K Clark From kevin at kevinfreels.com Sun Nov 13 22:43:21 2005 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevinfreels.com) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:43:21 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511121900.jACJ09e30231@tick.javien.com><003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer><006a01c5e821$dfc5e3a0$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <00bb01c5e828$996a65f0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> Message-ID: <001d01c5e8a3$a6bcc6f0$0100a8c0@kevin> Excuse me, but may I ask a question? Exactly how is it Walmart's responsibility to ensure that people have jobs and wealth? Is it not enough that because of them I save hundreds or even thousands of dollars per year? Since when did the size of a multi-natioinal corporation mean that you were required to provide for the financial security of a nation? Isn't it this kind of thought from labor unions that pushed the price of crappy American cars up to the price of a small house? Exactly how does the nation benefit from increased prices that are used to defray wage increases? When I go into walmart I see several things. I see employees that other companies simply would not hire. I see elderly people who failed to plan for retirement. I see young people starting out in the job market. I do not see middle aged people of average or above education age in their prime child rearing years working at this place. Sure, there are a few, but that is by choice. It's the same thing with McDonalds. How many people are employed at McDs? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Parkinson" To: "ExI chat list" ; "John K Clark" Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 2:02 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > From: "John K Clark" > To: "Jack Parkinson" > Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 3:13 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > > > "Jack Parkinson" > > > > > If, hypothetically, Wal-Mart was replaced by several thousand smaller > > > independent stores, all paying their employees a decent living wage, > > > and all competing to keep prices low, wouldn't the US be better > > > off in overall terms? > > > > NO! I rather doubt that Billy Bobs Pretty Good Hardware Store or any of > the > > thousands of other stores in your hypothetical could match Wal-Mart's > > legendary hyper efficiency; most economists agree that Wal-Mart can take > > credit for a big chunk of the productivity growth America had the good > > fortune to receive over the last 10 years, and productivity is the name of > > the game, it is the generator of wealth. So in your world the pool of > people > > wanting a job would be the same but there would be less money available to > > pay their salary. And consumers would be paying far more than they should > > for goods. That's not a world I want to live in. > > > > John K Clark > > Your remarks do not really make sense. > > 1) Thousands of stores competing would make for a pretty efficient market > system. Yes? > > 2) Where is the wealth that is being generated if more than 100,000 Wal-Mart > employees are living in poverty? > > 3) And if your answer is: in the Walton Family vaults - how is that useful > to America? > > 4) And if all that wealth was in distributed use across a broad range of > businesses competing for labor in a free market - surely there would be more > money available to pay the pool of workers? > > 5) How does increased productivity benefit America if it comes at a cost of > increased unemployment and (in today's news here from CNN) 35 million plus > American citizens living below the poverty line? > > Jack Parkinson > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From rhanson at gmu.edu Sun Nov 13 22:42:38 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:42:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> At 11:09 PM 11/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: >One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. Gee Hal, one person I wish would start a blog is Hal Finney. Could we make a deal? :) Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 22:47:54 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:47:54 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: even if Arab poverty were terminated In-Reply-To: References: <200511111320.jABDKee06122@tick.javien.com> <006501c5e6c8$f9289040$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/13/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > Plus, it's taken us some 300yrs to pull the teeth of Xianity to the point > where one can dissent openly and not be burned. > The job hasn't even begun with Islam. > I doubt that the teeth of Xianity have been pulled yet. At least not in every country. They may not be able to burn dissenters, but they can get you sacked and your career ruined if you cross the hierarchy. In USA and Ireland until recently priests were permitted to abuse children with little done to stop them. The latest Irish scandal reports: "Before 1990, the panel found, the police were reluctant to investigate claims of sexual abuse by the clergy because they were fearful of challenging the privileged position of Roman Catholic Church authorities." BillK From jay.dugger at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 23:07:45 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:07:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <5366105b0511131507y5014dd53r202dc49e9b484141@mail.gmail.com> On 11/13/05, Robin Hanson wrote: > At 11:09 PM 11/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: > >One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. > > Gee Hal, one person I wish would start a blog is Hal Finney. Could > we make a deal? :) > How about paired public New Year's Resolutions as the first blog post from each of you? From joel.pitt at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 23:19:43 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:19:43 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511131507y5014dd53r202dc49e9b484141@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> <5366105b0511131507y5014dd53r202dc49e9b484141@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Perhaps someone should do a blog post on a list of transhumanist blogs? I would do it on mine (http://ferrouswheel.blogspot.com/) but it is rather low key at the moment and not specifically on transhumanist topics. But failing anyone else volunteering I'll collect all the blogs in this thread and anyone else can forward their blog URL, title, and alias to me if they want it listed. Cheers, Joel On 11/14/05, Jay Dugger wrote: > On 11/13/05, Robin Hanson wrote: > > At 11:09 PM 11/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: > > >One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. > > > > Gee Hal, one person I wish would start a blog is Hal Finney. Could > > we make a deal? :) > > > > How about paired public New Year's Resolutions as the first blog post > from each of you? > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sun Nov 13 23:33:48 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:33:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> <5366105b0511131507y5014dd53r202dc49e9b484141@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4377CD5C.5050507@goldenfuture.net> Mine is at http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ ("Posthumanity Rising"). Of course, I've not added an entry since June, so I think I'd better get writing. Joseph Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: >Perhaps someone should do a blog post on a list of transhumanist blogs? > >I would do it on mine (http://ferrouswheel.blogspot.com/) but it is >rather low key at the moment and not specifically on transhumanist >topics. > >But failing anyone else volunteering I'll collect all the blogs in >this thread and anyone else can forward their blog URL, title, and >alias to me if they want it listed. > >Cheers, >Joel > >On 11/14/05, Jay Dugger wrote: > > >>On 11/13/05, Robin Hanson wrote: >> >> >>>At 11:09 PM 11/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: >>> >>> >>>>One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. >>>> >>>> >>>Gee Hal, one person I wish would start a blog is Hal Finney. Could >>>we make a deal? :) >>> >>> >>> >>How about paired public New Year's Resolutions as the first blog post >>from each of you? >>_______________________________________________ >>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 > > > > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 13 23:55:17 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 23:55:17 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: even if Arab poverty were terminated In-Reply-To: References: <200511111320.jABDKee06122@tick.javien.com> <006501c5e6c8$f9289040$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/13/05, BillK wrote: > > On 11/13/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > Plus, it's taken us some 300yrs to pull the teeth of Xianity to the > point > > where one can dissent openly and not be burned. > > The job hasn't even begun with Islam. > > > > I doubt that the teeth of Xianity have been pulled yet. At least not > in every country. They may not be able to burn dissenters, but they > can get you sacked and your career ruined if you cross the hierarchy. Not in any civilised nation that I know of. In USA and Ireland until recently priests were permitted to abuse > children with little done to stop them. > > The latest Irish scandal reports: > "Before 1990, the panel found, the police were reluctant to > investigate claims of sexual abuse by the clergy because they were > fearful of challenging the privileged position of Roman Catholic > Church authorities." > > < > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/international/europe/13ireland.html?pagewanted=1 > > > > Well, imagine what it was like in 'the good old days'. Like I've said elsewhere, they (Judeo/Xian/Islam) are poisonous creeds. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From extropy at unreasonable.com Mon Nov 14 00:09:25 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:09:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <001d01c5e8a3$a6bcc6f0$0100a8c0@kevin> References: <200511121900.jACJ09e30231@tick.javien.com> <003c01c5e805$31755220$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <006a01c5e821$dfc5e3a0$6f064e0c@MyComputer> <00bb01c5e828$996a65f0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <001d01c5e8a3$a6bcc6f0$0100a8c0@kevin> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051113184625.07426928@unreasonable.com> kevinfreels wrote: >When I go into walmart I see several things. I see employees that other >companies simply would not hire. I see elderly people who failed to plan for >retirement. I see young people starting out in the job market. I also see: - cheerful employees (not everyone, but more than in most other stores) - people shopping for whom the price difference means the difference between having and doing without - military families shopping -- in part because of the prices, in part because of the respect accorded them (go to the greeting card aisle and see the row of specialty cards to send to loved ones in the service) - guns and ammo for sale -- after places like K-Mart bowed to pressure and pulled them (and the ammo is there on an open shelf) - cheaply priced quality name-brands like Linksys, Stanley, or Honda - constant business innovation - lots of competition from nearly 100 oversized stores within a few minutes (we have Barnes & Noble a block from Borders, Circuit City sharing a parking lot with Best Buy, etc.) *and* local non-chain stores that hold their own -- David. From nanogirl at halcyon.com Mon Nov 14 00:38:58 2005 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:38:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20051113173534.02de0e70@gmu.edu> <5366105b0511131507y5014dd53r202dc49e9b484141@mail.gmail.com> <4377CD5C.5050507@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <005601c5e8b3$edf19630$0300a8c0@Nano> My max animation blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ My James Lewis progress blog: http://ginamiller.blogspot.com/ Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." ----- Original Message ----- From: Joseph Bloch To: ExI chat list Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 3:33 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] List member blogs Mine is at http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ ("Posthumanity Rising"). Of course, I've not added an entry since June, so I think I'd better get writing. Joseph Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: >Perhaps someone should do a blog post on a list of transhumanist blogs? > >I would do it on mine (http://ferrouswheel.blogspot.com/) but it is >rather low key at the moment and not specifically on transhumanist >topics. > >But failing anyone else volunteering I'll collect all the blogs in >this thread and anyone else can forward their blog URL, title, and >alias to me if they want it listed. > >Cheers, >Joel > >On 11/14/05, Jay Dugger wrote: > > >>On 11/13/05, Robin Hanson wrote: >> >> >>>At 11:09 PM 11/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: >>> >>> >>>>One person I wish would start a blog is Robin Hanson. >>>> >>>> >>>Gee Hal, one person I wish would start a blog is Hal Finney. Could >>>we make a deal? :) >>> >>> >>> >>How about paired public New Year's Resolutions as the first blog post >>from each of you? >>_______________________________________________ >>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 > > > > _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 14 01:26:42 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:26:42 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511131035m1748c69ftf8f72e87efaf98be@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511140126.jAE1Qoe30170@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jef Allbright > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > On 11/12/05, spike wrote: > > > > It's a moral paradox. If one is poor, then clearly > > it is OK to shop at Walmart... > > > > Like all paradox, it results from seeing the system at an insufficient > level of context. At a higher level these pieces have to fit (and new > paradox can then arise.)... > - Jef Thanks Jef for the insight that a new paradox can then arise. If we call out Walmart, we must include other places that are lousy places to work. How about Fry's Electronics? The idea was a good one: run an electronics store like you would a grocery store, plenty of cash registers to reduce the checkout time (our local Fry's has 60 going simultaneously, 60!), the lowest cost employees that can manage to show up to work, enormous volume sales, etc. So Fry's and Walmart. But wait, what about Target? Salvation Army? McDonalds? A number of paradoxes arise. Assume half of the Walmart employees live below the poverty level: Does it still count if they are unemployable *anywhere else* besides Walmart? Would they stay at Walmart if they could get a job elsewhere? Why? Would they not still be below the poverty line if they had no job at all? What if they live below the poverty level but are part-time workers by choice? Do they count? Do we measure "living below poverty level" by the amount of money they earn? If so what about those who have a home and no debts, so they can live just fine on the income that is defined as poverty level? An example would be the retired greeters, who may have a paid-off house and a paid-off car already. Do they count? How do you count people who would be above the poverty level if single but they have children, which puts them below the poverty level as a family. Walmart isn't allowed to pay more because of one's family status. Suppose we decided, as a society, to ruin Walmart by collectively not shopping there. OK, Wallyworld is gone. But now there is a new retailer that is at the bottom of the heap for how it treats workers, so let's nuke that one too. But now a new one is again the worst place in the world to work. No matter how many times we lather, rinse and repeat, somebody has to be Walmart. Or what? Suggestions welcome. spike From jef at jefallbright.net Mon Nov 14 02:12:38 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:12:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511140126.jAE1Qoe30170@tick.javien.com> References: <22360fa10511131035m1748c69ftf8f72e87efaf98be@mail.gmail.com> <200511140126.jAE1Qoe30170@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511131812y3133c84bqe175c2415cd4587@mail.gmail.com> On 11/13/05, spike wrote: > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jef Allbright > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > > > On 11/12/05, spike wrote: > > > > > > It's a moral paradox. If one is poor, then clearly > > > it is OK to shop at Walmart... > > > > > > > Like all paradox, it results from seeing the system at an insufficient > > level of context. At a higher level these pieces have to fit (and new > > paradox can then arise.)... > > - Jef > > Thanks Jef for the insight that a new paradox can then arise. Glad I could contribute that particular insight. ;-) > > If we call out Walmart, we must include other places that are > lousy places to work. How about Fry's Electronics? The idea > was a good one: run an electronics store like you would a > grocery store, plenty of cash registers to reduce the checkout > time (our local Fry's has 60 going simultaneously, 60!), the > lowest cost employees that can manage to show up to work, enormous > volume sales, etc. So Fry's and Walmart. But wait, what about > Target? Salvation Army? McDonalds? > > > Suppose we decided, as a society, to ruin Walmart by > collectively not shopping there. OK, Wallyworld is > gone. But now there is a new retailer that is at > the bottom of the heap for how it treats workers, so > let's nuke that one too. But now a new one is again > the worst place in the world to work. No matter > how many times we lather, rinse and repeat, somebody > has to be Walmart. > > Or what? Suggestions welcome. Glad also that you reframed it away from being about "moral" choices and toward being about relatively desirable places to work and trade. When the system works well, with all agents having sufficient freedom to adapt, the system will tend to ratchet in the desired direction providing growth for all. If we find ourselves locked into a system that is out of balance--the ruinous competition mentioned earlier--then we must hope that soon enough in the larger context our current system will be perturbed such that we can continue to play. For example, Walmart's cheap and standard low-end products being outsold due to a greater variety of more specialized goods being offered and transacted via Internet, or Microsoft losing its dominance by being outmaneuvered by a more agile company that gives aways most of it's product. In the real world, we're gaining more and more access to the larger context and it's becoming less and less likely that any company, locality or state can hold a monopoly for long. What I see lacking is popular recognition that neither pure capitalism nor pure socialism is going to be effective enough to survive. A more effective, higher level of organization will combine the strengths of a diverse free market under a shared framework that amplifies our awareness, and thus our decision-making, beyond individual capabilities. - Jef From extropy at unreasonable.com Mon Nov 14 02:15:08 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 21:15:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511140126.jAE1Qoe30170@tick.javien.com> References: <22360fa10511131035m1748c69ftf8f72e87efaf98be@mail.gmail.com> <200511140126.jAE1Qoe30170@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051113210616.076abc40@unreasonable.com> Spike wrote: >If we call out Walmart, we must include other places that are >lousy places to work. How about Fry's Electronics? The idea >was a good one: run an electronics store like you would a >grocery store, plenty of cash registers to reduce the checkout >time (our local Fry's has 60 going simultaneously, 60!), the >lowest cost employees that can manage to show up to work, enormous >volume sales, etc. So Fry's and Walmart. But wait, what about >Target? Salvation Army? McDonalds? And while you're at it, take out most bookstores and libraries. They typically pay less than other employers do, because they know most of their employees are willing to work for less in order to spend their workday surrounded by books. I'd expect the same at other retailers whose goods resonate with their staff, e.g., music, musical instrument, gun, hobbyist, craft, comics, coin, and woodworking stores. -- David. From jay.dugger at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 02:42:03 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:42:03 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] "Transhumanism" tag, was "List member blogs" Message-ID: <5366105b0511131842j9ef9675lff98284515580f@mail.gmail.com> Sunday, 13 November 2005 Hello all: I've added all the blog links from this thread to my del.icio.us bookmarks. They all have common tags of "transhumanism" and "blog". You can find the list from my bookmarks here: http://del.icio.us/jay.dugger/blog+transhumanism http://del.icio.us/rss/jay.dugger/blog+transhumanism (feed for the list) You can find all bookmarks so tagged and a feed for them at the following links. http://del.icio.us/tags/blog+transhumanism http://del.icio.us/rss/tag/blog+transhumanism If you use a social bookmarking service such as del.icio.us, you can contribute to the overall list by bookmarking and tagging blogs you associate with transhumanism. (Hint, hint--JPWP, A.G.) No need to keep a single list with someone maintaining it for so long as their interest lasts. Just act in your own best interest, and the service handles the rest. If your blog doesn't completely deal with transhumanist themes, consider tagging applicable posts with the Technorati tag "transhumanism". You can find a list of posts so tagged here: http://technorati.com/tag/transhumanism http://feeds.technorati.com/feed/posts/tag/transhumanism You might also consider looking for Flickr images so tagged. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/transhumanism/ http://www.flickr.com/services/feeds/photos_public.gne?tags=transhumanism&format=rss_200 -- Jay Dugger Pick one you like and donate: http://del.icio.us/jay.dugger/charity From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 14 02:46:33 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:46:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511131812y3133c84bqe175c2415cd4587@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511140246.jAE2kfe05672@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jef Allbright > Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 6:13 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > On 11/13/05, spike wrote: > > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jef Allbright > > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > France) > > > > > > On 11/12/05, spike wrote: > > > > > > > ... No matter > > how many times we lather, rinse and repeat, somebody > > has to be Walmart. > > > > Or what? Suggestions welcome. > > Glad also that you reframed it away from being about "moral" choices > and toward being about relatively desirable places to work and trade... - Jef Jef it occurred to me that Europe Inc. must have dealt with this problem a long time ago. I understand that civilization has been around a long time on that continent. How about it Europeans? How did you guys handle the classic conflict between small local shops and huge retail monsters? Do you have something analogous to the yank's Walmarts and Fry's? Do the big cities have them and the small towns not? If so, do people go to the cities to shop? No one has said much about the fact that bricks and mortar shops are getting ever more competition from Amazon.com and the rest of the internet fly-by-nights. We can easily imagine that Walmart might become the last retail building left standing. Europeans, do you guys buy computers and books the same way we do, over the internet? Do you get outta paying sales taxes that way? spike From live2scan at charter.net Mon Nov 14 02:59:50 2005 From: live2scan at charter.net (Dennis) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 21:59:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects Message-ID: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> I've been a long time ( since mid 90's) mostly lurker on one extropian list or another. Never thought I had much to contribute-not researcher, or media person- just humble MRI tech and usually too swamped with work to do much more than read this list . It's an achievement just to read my professional list half the time. But lately I've had a little more free time than usual and I've been toying with the idea of teaching a class in future/ singularity/life extension/etc at a local alternative educational facility. I imagine some of you have done such a thing. Is there a Web site that I might use so as not to have to reinvent the wheel on this subject or can some one suggest a group of them that I might use for reference or even just reflecting on your personal experiences with same. Thanks; Dennis Roberts live2scan at charter.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 03:24:33 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:24:33 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: National Novel Writing Month - who's game to try? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511120538pfcec17s@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0510152200s4520764et@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511120538pfcec17s@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I've (suicidally) signed up - and have done so for a few years now. I never get very far however - November is always is an extremely busy time of the year for me! Good work on hitting 20k - you're almost on the home stretch :) -Joel On 11/13/05, Emlyn wrote: > Is anyone else giving NaNoWriMo a go? > > I've just hit 20K words tonight. Oh the pain! > > On 16/10/05, Emlyn wrote: > > I was just forwarded information about National Novel Writing Month. > > Has anyone here heard of it? Basically, the idea is that over > > November, you (and a zillion other people who've signed up) write a > > novel, from scratch. > > > > http://www.nanowrimo.org/ > >... > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * > NaNoWriMo word count: 20427 (http://nanowrimo.org) > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 14 07:52:58 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 23:52:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051114075258.90178.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > Do me a favor and honestly ask yourself one > question, what is really your > top priority in this matter? Is it solving the > problem of world poverty or > is it showing off to the world what a caring > empathetic man you are? No > need to tell me your answer because I don't need to > be a psychic to know > what you will say, but tell yourself the truth. And > don't worry, I won't > hear. My top priority was simply to engage you in a rational discourse regarding Wal-Mart's business practices. Nothing said by me is going to put the slightest dent in world poverty. But neither is Wal-Mart's seven cents an hour. All that is doing is bringing poverty back from the third world to our own shores. As if the Waltons were even the slightest bit concerned with anybody other than themsleves. Poverty itself is an artifice of materialistic culture that Wal-Mart epitomizes. Mankind has did without money for 95% of the million or so years that he has been around. It is only because people with huge amounts of money insist that EVERYBODY needs it, and refuse to allow people to live in peace without it, that poverty even exists. That these privilaged few seize land in undeveloped nations at gun point and coerce the common people in those lands to squander the precious years of their lives in servitude to them in exchange for getting minute quantities of it doled out to them, is why world poverty has even become an issue at all. So how can you possibly alleviate world poverty with the very same system that created it in the first place? Animals can exhibit selfishness, greed, and violent territoriallity. So show me why the Waltons are not animals? Show me how sweat shops prevent more hunger than simply tearing them down and cultivating the land upon which they stood with crops? Show me how Sam Walton is more humane than Mother Teresa? Or is it simply a matter of faith for you with no reasoning behind it? Pardon me for being an infidel in your money worship. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 14 08:49:35 2005 From: bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk (bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:49:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects In-Reply-To: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> Message-ID: <20051114084935.16996.qmail@web26706.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I've been working on a similar project in the UK (although it's been shelved for a few months due to day job work pressure). What we need is a structured syllabus for Transhumanist & Extropian flavoured memes. The WTA has one (put together by Nick Bostrum I believe), and I've also been constructing one of my own, where the lead in is via the new high-tech sciences, Bio Science, Genetics and Nanotech. This often overcomes initial nervousness on the part of traditional educational establishments and easily implies H+. I've successfully run short courses on Nanotech and its implications in a UK FE College and a teaching Hospital, and the attendees have been more interested in the consequences than in the technology! Check out the resources on the WTA website (I'm assuming you've already done so on the Extropy site). But if you are developing/tailoring one of your own, I'm happy to collaborate. Julian (Director UKTA) --- Dennis wrote: > I've been a long time ( since mid 90's) mostly > lurker on one extropian list or another. Never > thought I had much to contribute-not researcher, or > media person- just humble MRI tech and usually too > swamped with work to do much more than read this > list . It's an achievement just to read my > professional list half the time. > But lately I've had a little more free time than > usual and I've been toying with the idea of teaching > a class in future/ singularity/life extension/etc at > a local alternative educational facility. > I imagine some of you have done such a thing. Is > there a Web site that I might use so as not to have > to reinvent the wheel on this subject or can some > one suggest a group of them that I might use for > reference or even just reflecting on your personal > experiences with same. > > Thanks; > Dennis Roberts > live2scan at charter.net> _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > "Fahrkarte bis zur Endstation!" ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 14 09:21:56 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:21:56 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net: [IP] Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] Message-ID: <20051114092156.GO2249@leitl.org> ----- Forwarded message from David Farber ----- From: David Farber Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 21:15:20 -0500 To: ip at v2.listbox.com Subject: [IP] Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) Reply-To: dave at farber.net Begin forwarded message: From: Brett Glass Date: November 13, 2005 8:39:02 PM EST To: Dave Farber , Ip ip Subject: Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie Dave: For IP, if you'd like. Josh Thompson, president of a left-leaning political group on the University of Wyoming campus, was distributing handbills for a screening of the movie "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price" when one of the women to whom he gave a handbill mentioned that she worked for Wal-Mart. "All the more reason for you to come and see this important film," said Thompson. "I can't," replied the employee. "Management will be attending this screening, and if any Wal-Mart employee is seen by them attending any screening, we've been told that we will be fired." Apparently, the controversial documentary -- which has received rave reviews from several media outlets -- is so worrisome to Wal-Mart that they've threatened employees with termination if they so much as see it. Regardless of your political stance or affiliation, it should give you pause that any corporation would try to exert control over employees' media choices outside of working hours, don't you think? --Brett Glass ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as eugen at leitl.org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 10:32:49 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:32:49 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net: [IP] Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] In-Reply-To: <20051114092156.GO2249@leitl.org> References: <20051114092156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from David Farber ----- > > Apparently, the controversial documentary -- which has received rave > reviews from several media outlets -- is so worrisome to Wal-Mart > that they've threatened employees with termination if they so much as > see it. > > Regardless of your political stance or affiliation, it should give > you pause that any corporation would try to exert control over > employees' media choices outside of working hours, don't you think? > Movie reviewed on New York Times - (more reviews available via Google) (Long link bypasses NYT login) The saddest part of this documentary is a series of shots of abandoned Main Streets, empty store after empty store, with Bruce Springsteen's plaintive version of "This Land Is Your Land" as accompaniment. But vanquishing thousands of small businesses coast to coast is not Wal-Mart's only crime, its critics say. They also cite the company's treatment of its employees, whose average annual income is under $14,000. The company offers health insurance, but it is so expensive, employees say, that most people can't afford it. According to the documentary, company representatives openly recommend that workers sign up for government-aid programs instead. "The High Cost of Low Price" makes its case with breathtaking force. Mr. Scott of Wal-Mart declined to speak on camera, Mr. Greenwald says. The company is worried enough about this film and growing opposition elsewhere that it has hired high-powered former presidential advisers and set up a public relations "war room" to deflect and respond to criticism. etc. ------------------ BillK From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 11:22:59 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:22:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <200511140246.jAE2kfe05672@tick.javien.com> References: <22360fa10511131812y3133c84bqe175c2415cd4587@mail.gmail.com> <200511140246.jAE2kfe05672@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990511140322n408dc9b8rd44c5766c7f4711@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, spike wrote: > > > Jef it occurred to me that Europe Inc. must have dealt > with this problem a long time ago. I understand that > civilization has been around a long time on that > continent. How about it Europeans? How did you > guys handle the classic conflict between small > local shops and huge retail monsters? Do you > have something analogous to the yank's Walmarts > and Fry's? Do the big cities have > them and the small towns not? If so, do > people go to the cities to shop? (not speaking for the whole Europe, just for my country) Sorry but we didn't deal with this problem a long time ago, actually we are just starting, and we are behing the US in this kind of things. Small shops were the rule until a few years ago, except for grocery store chains. In the last ten or five years, a lot of huge shopping centers sprung up around the cities. They are seen as an "americanized" way of doing shopping. A few of the mentioned grocery store chains are starting to expand their product range in the "everything" direction, so they could be start being comparable with US retail giants. They sometimes have a socialistic touch, for example one of the biggest is Coop (short for "cooperative"), which just opened another IperCoop megastore not far from here. You can become a member of the cooperative, effectively buying a vanishingly small part of it, they have special savings accounts for their members, have published specs for quality control, etc. Most others are purely retail and compete almost only on price. But the huge retail centers are still quite new. Also, keep in mind that a 60 minutes drive is considered "long" around here, especially for shopping, so in the small towns most people goes to the small local shops. Alfio From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 12:55:21 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:55:21 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990511140322n408dc9b8rd44c5766c7f4711@mail.gmail.com> References: <22360fa10511131812y3133c84bqe175c2415cd4587@mail.gmail.com> <200511140246.jAE2kfe05672@tick.javien.com> <4902d9990511140322n408dc9b8rd44c5766c7f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > > But the huge retail centers are still quite new. Also, keep in mind > that a 60 minutes drive is considered "long" around here, especially > for shopping, so in the small towns most people goes to the small > local shops. > And of course in Euroland that means 2 hours total travel time and 25 to 30 USD fuel cost that must be added to the 'bargains' that you buy. BillK From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 13:01:50 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:01:50 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <22360fa10511131812y3133c84bqe175c2415cd4587@mail.gmail.com> <200511140246.jAE2kfe05672@tick.javien.com> <4902d9990511140322n408dc9b8rd44c5766c7f4711@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990511140501i3708449y59ac9c6492ffa3bf@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, BillK wrote: > And of course in Euroland that means 2 hours total travel time and 25 > to 30 USD fuel cost that must be added to the 'bargains' that you buy. Not really 25 USD. If you drive say 40km for the nearest city that's 2 or 3 litres of gas each way, so 6 euros (7 USD) total. Alfio From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 14 13:22:51 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:22:51 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) Message-ID: Alfio: There is a social impact too. Some fiorentinos told me that, when this place http://www.igigli.it/1001300204/portal_ne=1001300204&cp=22723&l=1&d=MPS&pt=&pg=1&ids=0&id1=.htm opened, it acted like a large magnet, attracting the young people, so the 'character' of Firenze changed. I have visited this place (it is very close to the company that built our Dawn VIR instrument), and, on the scale of US shopping malls, it is on the small side. Can you comment on how this mall affects people in Florence? Amara From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 13:50:08 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:50:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4902d9990511140550y3163fbd0jf3fe7a0f945b416b@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, Amara Graps wrote: > Alfio: > > There is a social impact too. Some fiorentinos told me that, when this > place > > http://www.igigli.it/1001300204/portal_ne=1001300204&cp=22723&l=1&d=MPS&pt=&pg=1&ids=0&id1=.htm > > opened, it acted like a large magnet, attracting the young people, so > the 'character' of Firenze changed. I have visited this place (it is > very close to the company that built our Dawn VIR instrument), and, on > the scale of US shopping malls, it is on the small side. Can you > comment on how this mall affects people in Florence? It mainly affects people living in the surrounding towns: young people didn't have many places to go, and going to Gigli become something common on friday and saturday afternoons, plus the whole sunday - not for shopping, but just for hanging around. It's easily reacheable from nearby towns, many of which are experiencing population increases (the location of the shopping center wasn't chosen at random :-) People living in the city tend to go there if they have a specific reason, it's at least a 30 minutes drive with heavy traffic, and Firenze has a lot of places for social needs. This doesn't mean that they don't go there at all (you can even find me there once every month or two), but that it's not a casual meeting place. In the area near Gigli, about three or four smaller shopping centers have opened in the last five years, along with cinema multiplexes, Ikea stores and similar things, giving birth to a kind of shopping belt around the north-west part of the city. In some ways, going outside the city was the only practical choice: Firenze is very compressed and there's literally not enough space within the city limits for this kind of shopping centers. Alfio From mbb386 at main.nc.us Mon Nov 14 14:35:18 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:35:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects In-Reply-To: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> References: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> Message-ID: <46305.72.236.102.90.1131978918.squirrel@main.nc.us> > I've been > toying with the idea of teaching a class in future/ singularity/life extension/etc at a local alternative educational facility. Where is this facility? I might be interested in coming to your class. :) Much of what's on this list is so far over my head that I'm pretty hopelessly lost, and I'd like to understand more. Regards, MB From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Nov 14 15:03:34 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:03:34 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects In-Reply-To: <20051114084935.16996.qmail@web26706.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> <20051114084935.16996.qmail@web26706.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051114090012.07c5ac18@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 02:49 AM 11/14/2005, you wrote: >I've been working on a similar project in the UK >(although it's been shelved for a few months due to >day job work pressure). > >What we need is a structured syllabus for >Transhumanist & Extropian flavoured memes. I agree in total! I'm finishing up my master thesis right now and want to focus on this as soon as possible - that would be in January. One of ExI's goals is to offer a course on the future through Extropy Institute. The material I have accumulated from my masters degree is highly relevant for this (Masters of Science in Studies of the Future). Most of my work in this graduate program has been related to transhumanism in general and Extropy Institute and the future in particular. I'll collaborate with anyone who wants to teach! Best wishes, Natasha Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 15:22:06 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:22:06 -0600 Subject: Driving was Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? Message-ID: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> 40 km (=24.85 miles) x 2 = 49.7 miles - in two hours? Wow, when I drive to work, I make 45 miles in 45 minutes. What kind of a car are you driving? Burning 6 liters( = 1.584 gallons) for 49.7 miles in very slow driving makes 31.4 mpg. Even hybrids don't always get this kind of mileage. And the lower number you give, 4 liters both ways, would make it 47.1 mpg, beyond even Prius territory (in real life, as opposed to salesman pitch). I burn about 16 $ a day over about 90 miles. Rafal On 11/14/05, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On 11/14/05, BillK wrote: > > > And of course in Euroland that means 2 hours total travel time and 25 > > to 30 USD fuel cost that must be added to the 'bargains' that you buy. > > Not really 25 USD. If you drive say 40km for the nearest city that's 2 > or 3 litres of gas each way, so 6 euros (7 USD) total. > > Alfio > From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 14 15:23:58 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:23:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051114075258.90178.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001201c5e92f$7b4e7040$200e4e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > As if the Waltons were even the slightest bit concerned > with anybody other than themsleves. Concerned? I have no idea who if anybody Sam Walton was personally concerned about and frankly my dear I don't give a damn. I'm interested in results, I don't give a hoot in hell about intentions. I hope I don't come across sounding too cynical but any economic system that must rely on people loving each other is just not going to work. The farmer grows my food, the trucker moves my food and the grocer sells my food and none of these people love me, yet the free market plunges them into a conspiracy to put food on my table. > So how can you possibly alleviate world poverty with > the very same system that created it in the first place? Capitalism certainly didn't cause world poverty and I can do much better than tell you how it can alleviate it, I can give you example after example after example where it HAS alleviated it. If you don't believe me then ask a few hundred million people in China, or those in South Korea, or Formosa, or Singapore, or Honk Kong or.... > Mankind has did without money for 95% of the million > or so years that he has been around. It is only > because people with huge amounts of money insist that > EVERYBODY needs it, and refuse to allow people to live > in peace without it, that poverty even exists. Wow! And I thought Islam was bad trying to bring the world back to the 13'th century, but you put them to shame, you want to bring things back to prehistoric times. Pol Pot in Cambodia had similar ideas. John K Clark From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 14 15:46:05 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:46:05 +0100 Subject: Driving was Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051114154604.GF2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 09:22:06AM -0600, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > 40 km (=24.85 miles) x 2 = 49.7 miles - in two hours? > > Wow, when I drive to work, I make 45 miles in 45 minutes. It obviously depends on the local traffic. > What kind of a car are you driving? Burning 6 liters( = 1.584 gallons) > for 49.7 miles in very slow driving makes 31.4 mpg. Even hybrids don't > always get this kind of mileage. And the lower number you give, 4 Current hybrids are not particularly efficient. Right now I range between 5.8 and 6.6 l/100 km (depending on the driving style), and my car is not that efficient (a Honda Jazz). > liters both ways, would make it 47.1 mpg, beyond even Prius territory > (in real life, as opposed to salesman pitch). > > I burn about 16 $ a day over about 90 miles. I burn about 50 EUR/month for gas. Considerably less when I take the bike (about 50 min one way). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 16:20:51 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:20:51 +0100 Subject: Driving was Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990511140820l35e00de8vfd1e36fba565be17@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > 40 km (=24.85 miles) x 2 = 49.7 miles - in two hours? > > Wow, when I drive to work, I make 45 miles in 45 minutes. So you average 60 mph. On a highway, or in some other empty country road. Around here most of the terrain is hills and mountains, and unless you live in the right town near the highway you cannot hope of averaging more than 50 km/h (30 mph). And in big cities the traffic is very heavy, the average speed is much slower. > What kind of a car are you driving? Burning 6 liters( = 1.584 gallons) > for 49.7 miles in very slow driving makes 31.4 mpg. My car is small (Renault Clio 1.2L), and gets between 17 and 20 km/l. That would be 39 and 47 mpg. The manufacturer claims 48 mpg in the best case, which is spot on. At the legal speed limit of 80 mph it gets around 15 km/l (35 mpg). Around one third of all the cars in Italy are about this size, and get similar fuel economy. I put a lower number of 4 liters because modern diesel cars like the Golf TDI or similar engines can get better mileage than my car, about 50-55 mpg if you are light on the gas pedal, while being at the same time more powerful than mine (if you press on the pedal...) > Even hybrids don't always get this kind of mileage. And the lower number you give, 4 > liters both ways, would make it 47.1 mpg, beyond even Prius territory > (in real life, as opposed to salesman pitch). I'm always surprised at how much fuel a US hybrid requires. > I burn about 16 $ a day over about 90 miles. I live 4.5 miles from work, but it takes 15 minutes to get there with the car due to rush hour and traffic lights. It takes a bit more with the bicycle, because it's on the top of a moderate hill. The time it takes me to get to work is lower than the average, but not by much. Between 30 and 60 minutes people start bitching about how long it is. Alfio From hibbert at mydruthers.com Mon Nov 14 17:16:59 2005 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:16:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <4378C68B.3090707@mydruthers.com> > I'd be interested in hearing about other blogs maintained by current > and former list members. Maybe we could make a list. My blog is pancrit.org. I usually write an entry once a week. Most of it is book reviews, but there's a smattering of other things. Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://pancrit.org From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 17:44:34 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:44:34 +0000 Subject: Driving was Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4902d9990511140820l35e00de8vfd1e36fba565be17@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60511140722u11f047fiddc9dd7bad8b6518@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990511140820l35e00de8vfd1e36fba565be17@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On 11/14/05, BillK wrote: > > > And of course in Euroland that means 2 hours total travel time and 25 > > to 30 USD fuel cost that must be added to the 'bargains' that you buy. > > Not really 25 USD. If you drive say 40km for the nearest city that's 2 > or 3 litres of gas each way, so 6 euros (7 USD) total. > My assumption was that if you were driving for an hour each way it would be more than 25 miles (40km), probably nearer 60 miles (100Km) each way in a mix of city traffic and motorway. The average medium size cars in the UK only get about 35 miles per gallon (12.3 k/ltr), big cars, 4WDs and SUVs nearer 20 mpg. (UK gallons) or 7k/ltr. Small, economy cars do approach 50 mpg (17.6 k/ltr), but most families drive medium-size cars. So, say 120 miles = 192 km = 18.28 ltrs = 14.50 GBP = 25.16 USD. But I agree fuel cost could range from 8 USD to 44.25 USD, depending on distance and fuel conomy. YMMV :) BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 14 19:23:04 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 11:23:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) French claim Paris riots more cultured than American riots In-Reply-To: <4376D720.9050606@mindspring.com> References: <4376D720.9050606@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <1C58771F-1C0F-4F85-AFAF-9E32EDB93E83@mac.com> On Nov 12, 2005, at 10:03 PM, Terry W. Colvin wrote: > >> French authorities have been reluctant to send in troops to quell >> the protests, insisting that a military presence will only be >> legitimate with UN backing. Bringing the riots under control has >> been dismissed as "Anglo-Saxon policing" by members of the >> Government. "We do not want to relinquish our proud French >> traditions just because they cause mass civil unrest," said Social >> Affairs Minister Jean-Louis Borloo. "We will not trade in racism, >> mass unemployment and arrogant timidity in policing for a >> "McCulture" of law and order." >> > This is probably one of the better clues as to why this happened in France. Government that is unwilling to keep the peace hardly deserves the name. I could understand if the riots had some deeper political significance perhaps. But simple out of control destruction for no cause but mass frustration? I would have sent in enough police and troops to stop this long ago. Yes, work on fixing the underlying problems. But in the meantime don't jut let the cities burn. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 14 19:27:50 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 11:27:50 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> Please spell out the dangers you allude to. - s On Nov 13, 2005, at 9:22 AM, Jef Allbright wrote: > On 11/11/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > >> Dead cheap molecular manufacturing could end such strife - in the >> right >> hands (that is - everyone's hands) But, if and when it arrives - it's >> deliberate restriction to a privileged few could also give us >> strife we >> never before considered even possible. >> Unfortunately - I share your gloomy outlook. >> > > Cheap ubiquitous molecular manufacturing could certainly end the > strife over scarcity of subsistence level resources, but only if used > wisely. To put such power in everyone's hands, without first having a > framework of rational interdependence, would be like providing > gasoline to children playing with matches. > > - Jef > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 14 19:45:19 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 11:45:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net: [IP] Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] In-Reply-To: References: <20051114092156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <9BE77785-B1A4-4D2E-9936-DA8AD2AA5C51@mac.com> On Nov 14, 2005, at 2:32 AM, BillK wrote: > > They also cite the company's treatment of its employees, whose average > annual income is under $14,000. The company offers health insurance, > but it is so expensive, employees say, that most people can't afford > it. According to the documentary, company representatives openly > recommend that workers sign up for government-aid programs instead. > Hmm. I wonder why our ire is not also focused on a government that a) owns over 40% of the land; b) takes over 50% of the product of everyone's labor by force; c) regulates and licenses so much that many of the power have nothing left but its dole; d) despite (a) and (b) has a running immediate debt of over $8 trillion; e) has nearly 10 times the amount in (d) of total money commitment going forward that can only be paid by taking it from us; f) holds more people in jail per capita than any other nation. etc. Considering what that fat bloated tick is doing to the country I am not as horrified that a private employer suggests going to the government to make up the difference. I am far more horrified and utterly pissed at the government than at WalMart. But the people will clamor for the government to get even bigger and enslave and impoverish them to an even greater level. Then their conscience will be assuaged. - samantha From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 20:05:12 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 20:05:12 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > Please spell out the dangers you allude to. > > Well, manufacturing weapons, explosives, bioweapons, wargasses etc That would do for a start. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 14 20:37:57 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:37:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Minerva lost in space Message-ID: Minerva, the little probe that was supposed to hop around asteroid Itokawa and take images, hopped off into space :-( http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn8311 Amara From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 20:45:22 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:45:22 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) French claim Paris riots more cultured than American riots In-Reply-To: <1C58771F-1C0F-4F85-AFAF-9E32EDB93E83@mac.com> References: <4376D720.9050606@mindspring.com> <1C58771F-1C0F-4F85-AFAF-9E32EDB93E83@mac.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990511141245r40050a76hc0a399b7ad0ec05f@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On Nov 12, 2005, at 10:03 PM, Terry W. Colvin wrote: > > > > >> French authorities have been reluctant to send in troops to quell > >> the protests, insisting that a military presence will only be > >> legitimate with UN backing. Bringing the riots under control has > >> been dismissed as "Anglo-Saxon policing" by members of the > >> Government. "We do not want to relinquish our proud French > >> traditions just because they cause mass civil unrest," said Social > >> Affairs Minister Jean-Louis Borloo. "We will not trade in racism, > >> mass unemployment and arrogant timidity in policing for a > >> "McCulture" of law and order." > >> > > > > This is probably one of the better clues as to why this happened in > France. Government that is unwilling to keep the peace hardly > deserves the name. I could understand if the riots had some deeper > political significance perhaps. But simple out of control > destruction for no cause but mass frustration? I would have sent in > enough police and troops to stop this long ago. Yes, work on fixing > the underlying problems. But in the meantime don't jut let the > cities burn. I was assuming that it was a satire? UN backing???? Alfio From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 14 21:27:54 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:27:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> Message-ID: <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> With material plenty do you think this is likely? But wait, I thoroughly believe in the right to obtain and bear arms. So we may disagree or which kinds of things are a problem. A nano-factory cannot produce anything it doesn't have a blueprint for. That is one level of control. Nanofactories could come with certain built-in restrictions giving another level of control. The problems could also be addressed by something like the broadcast model proposed by Ralph Merkle (http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/selfRepJBIS.html). Generally speaking I am more interested in empowering people and in fighting abuses they actually do commit than in keeping them harmless by decreasing their abilities and access. - s On Nov 14, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Please spell out the dangers you allude to. > > > Well, manufacturing weapons, explosives, bioweapons, wargasses etc > That would do for a start. > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 21:42:00 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:42:00 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > With material plenty do you think this is likely? But wait, I thoroughly > believe in the right to obtain and bear arms. So we may disagree or Material plenty simply means that the fighting will be over power, religion and ideology. which kinds of things are a problem. A nano-factory cannot produce anything > it doesn't have a blueprint for. That is one level of control. How much of a blueprint does a gene machine require to synthesise a gene? Nanofactories could come with certain built-in restrictions giving another > level of control. The problems could also be addressed by something like the > broadcast model proposed by Ralph Merkle ( > http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/selfRepJBIS.html). > Generally speaking I am more interested in empowering people and in > fighting abuses they actually do commit than in keeping them harmless by > decreasing their abilities and access. > > I think that such factories will be common, and that restrictions on their use will be just as effective as DRM is in music today. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From live2scan at charter.net Mon Nov 14 22:07:03 2005 From: live2scan at charter.net (Dennis) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:07:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects References: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> <46305.72.236.102.90.1131978918.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <001f01c5e967$dad06180$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> Why be confused, I'm sure there are any number of list members, myself included, who would be willing to clarify anything that you have trouble getting your mind around. The school is an open university format institution in western North Carolina. Probably a bit off the beaten path for most, but I believe that I'm not the only one on this list from these parts. Dennis Roberts live2scan at charter.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "M.B. Baumeister" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 9:35 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects > > I've been > > toying with the idea of teaching a class in future/ singularity/life > extension/etc at a local alternative educational facility. > > > Where is this facility? I might be interested in coming to your class. :) > Much of what's on this list is so far over my head that I'm pretty > hopelessly lost, and I'd like to understand more. > > Regards, > MB > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jef at jefallbright.net Mon Nov 14 22:57:17 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:57:17 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511141457t33c32cffpb3224fbffd960aac@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > With material plenty do you think this is likely? But wait, I thoroughly > believe in the right to obtain and bear arms. So we may disagree or > > Material plenty simply means that the fighting will be over power, religion > and ideology. > > > which kinds of things are a problem. A nano-factory cannot produce > anything it doesn't have a blueprint for. That is one level of control. > > How much of a blueprint does a gene machine require to synthesise a gene? > > > Nanofactories could come with certain built-in restrictions giving another > level of control. The problems could also be addressed by something like > the broadcast model proposed by Ralph Merkle > (http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/selfRepJBIS.html ). > > > > > > Generally speaking I am more interested in empowering people and in > fighting abuses they actually do commit than in keeping them harmless by > decreasing their abilities and access. > > > > > I think that such factories will be common, and that restrictions on their > use will be just as effective as DRM is in music today. Dirk expressed the kinds of dangers I had in mind, but the subsequent discussion seems to have been about control of threats (and its ultimate ineffectiveness) rather than the accelerating growth of wisdom I had in mind. I see technological risk accelerating at a rate faster than the development of individual human intelligence (which gives us much of our built-in sense of morality), and faster than cultural intelligence (from which we get moral guidance based on societal beliefs) but maybe--just maybe--not faster than technologically based amplification of human values exploiting accelerating instrumental knowledge to implement effective decision-making which, as I've explained elsewhere in more detail, is a more encompassing concept of morality. I apologize, as usual, for the density of my post. - Jef From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 14 23:01:10 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:01:10 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511141457t33c32cffpb3224fbffd960aac@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> <22360fa10511141457t33c32cffpb3224fbffd960aac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/14/05, Jef Allbright wrote: > > On 11/14/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > > > > On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > With material plenty do you think this is likely? But wait, I > thoroughly > > believe in the right to obtain and bear arms. So we may disagree or > > > > Material plenty simply means that the fighting will be over power, > religion > > and ideology. > > > > > which kinds of things are a problem. A nano-factory cannot produce > > anything it doesn't have a blueprint for. That is one level of control. > > > > How much of a blueprint does a gene machine require to synthesise a > gene? > > > > > Nanofactories could come with certain built-in restrictions giving > another > > level of control. The problems could also be addressed by something like > > the broadcast model proposed by Ralph Merkle > > (http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/selfRepJBIS.html ). > > > > > > > > > Generally speaking I am more interested in empowering people and in > > fighting abuses they actually do commit than in keeping them harmless by > > decreasing their abilities and access. > > > > > > > > I think that such factories will be common, and that restrictions on > their > > use will be just as effective as DRM is in music today. > > Dirk expressed the kinds of dangers I had in mind, but the subsequent > discussion seems to have been about control of threats (and its > ultimate ineffectiveness) rather than the accelerating growth of > wisdom I had in mind. > > I see technological risk accelerating at a rate faster than the > development of individual human intelligence (which gives us much of > our built-in sense of morality), and faster than cultural intelligence > (from which we get moral guidance based on societal beliefs) but > maybe--just maybe--not faster than technologically based amplification > of human values exploiting accelerating instrumental knowledge to > implement effective decision-making which, as I've explained elsewhere > in more detail, is a more encompassing concept of morality. I too think it will be a close run race between PostHuman society and extinction (or at best a massive dieback and new dark age). Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 15 00:57:41 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:57:41 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511141457t33c32cffpb3224fbffd960aac@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> <22360fa10511141457t33c32cffpb3224fbffd960aac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <62C7F75E-B956-4E1A-ACF5-996C9DFC17FD@mac.com> On Nov 14, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Jef Allbright wrote: > > I see technological risk accelerating at a rate faster than the > development of individual human intelligence (which gives us much of > our built-in sense of morality), and faster than cultural intelligence > (from which we get moral guidance based on societal beliefs) but > maybe--just maybe--not faster than technologically based amplification > of human values exploiting accelerating instrumental knowledge to > implement effective decision-making which, as I've explained elsewhere > in more detail, is a more encompassing concept of morality. > I agree that IA is very important. However it is not obvious that higher effective intelligence and much more effective decision making [redundant?] will lead to more moral or wise goals. It could lead to much more efficiently implementing the same old goals and prejudices. I still believe it is a net great improvement to today's insanity as so much of it seems to grow out of rank stupidity. If higher intelligence could be more tied to critical examination of current assumptions and goals and much more aware choosing of goals then we would see much greater improvement. But how are you going to get pst the propensity of human beings to ignore the knowledge they do have and the amount of decision making power they now possess? > I apologize, as usual, for the density of my post. No apologies needed that I can see. - samantha From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 15 01:36:51 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 20:36:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects In-Reply-To: <001f01c5e967$dad06180$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> References: <00a201c5e8c7$7b4088d0$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> <46305.72.236.102.90.1131978918.squirrel@main.nc.us> <001f01c5e967$dad06180$640fa8c0@dennis1zpu5spy> Message-ID: <46632.72.236.103.131.1132018611.squirrel@main.nc.us> > The school is an open university format > institution in western North Carolina. Probably a bit off the beaten path > for most, but I believe that I'm not the only one on this list from these > parts. That's kinda what I figured. Make sure to publish on the list where and when you'll teach your class. If I can afford it and it's not in conflict with the other things I do I'd like to attend. Regards, MB From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Tue Nov 15 02:24:56 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:24:56 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511141900.jAEJ09e22691@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <001d01c5e98b$c6691ab0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: "John K Clark" > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: <001201c5e92f$7b4e7040$200e4e0c at MyComputer> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > "The Avantguardian" > >> As if the Waltons were even the slightest bit concerned >> with anybody other than themsleves. > > Concerned? I have no idea who if anybody Sam Walton was personally > concerned > about and frankly my dear I don't give a damn. I'm interested in results, > I > don't give a hoot in hell about intentions. John still has not said why it is he believes that a Wal-Mart market monopoly is in in any sense more 'free market' or 'efficient' than several thousand smaller stores offering: a) choice for consumers - more places to shop b) choice for workers - more business competing for labor, more capital in circulation as opposed to locked away with one small group c) choice for entrepeneurs - more business opportunities - less chance of a reasonable business being stifled and forced out of the market in a 'David vs Goliath' scenario d) a real competing business environment to keep prices reasonable >I hope I don't come across > sounding too cynical but any economic system that must rely on people > loving > each other is just not going to work. The farmer grows my food, the > trucker > moves my food and the grocer sells my food and none of these people love > me, > yet the free market plunges them into a conspiracy to put food on my > table. > John K Clark "Love" is not the point. But this statement seems to beg the question: What is the purpose of the national economy? (Any national economy) If that purpose IS the good of all its constituent citizens - then surely by this criterion the 'legendary hyper-efficiency' of Wal-Mart you mentioned in a previous post is actually hyper-inefficiency? It boils down to the question: Does the economy serve the citizens of the country? (In which case all corporate activity should be judged by benefits accruing to EVERY sector of society), or do the citizens serve the economy? (In which case, poverty line workers are an excellent idea - the only important thing is that corporations get rich) I submit that Wal-Mart does not effectively serve every sector, in fact it primarikly seves a miniscule portion of it - the Waltons. And, that in consequence of this, the country - and the people - would generally be better off without this corporate giant. Jack Parkinson From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 02:38:09 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:38:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? Message-ID: The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think-tank). http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-smith_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.2f25c31.html Some quotes: Look out, America: The trajectory of science is coming into conflict with venerable human values and even our self-definition as a species, raising urgent ethical issues that will have to be answered before it is too late. ... The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that all human beings have equal moral worth, regardless of their abilities or capacities. This objective standard is now threatened by "personhood theory," which holds that rights only belong to "persons," a status earned by possessing minimal cognitive capacities. If personhood theory supplants sanctity of life as the governing ethic of society, it would open the door to harvesting organs from people like Terri Schiavo or permitting biotechnologists to "farm" cloned fetuses for use in drug testing or experiments in genetic engineering. ... If scientists can insert human DNA into animal embryos, then animal DNA could just as easily be inserted into human embryos. Such experiments are far from unthinkable. A social movement called "transhumanism" advocates the creation of a "post human species," which would include using animal genes in progeny to increase strength or make senses more acute. ... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 03:03:31 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:03:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Elon Musk on SpaceX's future rockets Message-ID: Elon Musk, the former CEO of Paypal and current CEO of SpaceX, discusses his work with privately developing low-cost, high-reliability rockets. In the long term, he intends to build a Saturn V-class vehicle, dubbed the "BFR," which would be useful for transporting the infrastructure needed to colonize the Moon and Mars. http://thespacereview.com/article/497/1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 03:07:14 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 03:07:14 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/15/05, Neil H. wrote: > > The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior fellow > at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think-tank). > > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-smith_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.2f25c31.html > > > Some quotes: > > Look out, America: The trajectory of science is coming into conflict with > venerable human values and even our self-definition as a species, raising > urgent ethical issues that will have to be answered before it is too late. > ... > > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that all human beings have > equal moral worth, regardless of their abilities or capacities. This > objective standard is now threatened by "personhood theory," which holds > that rights only belong to "persons," a status earned by possessing minimal > cognitive capacities. If personhood theory supplants sanctity of life as the > governing ethic of society, it would open the door to harvesting organs from > people like Terri Schiavo or permitting biotechnologists to "farm" cloned > fetuses for use in drug testing or experiments in genetic engineering. > ... > If scientists can insert human DNA into animal embryos, then animal DNA > could just as easily be inserted into human embryos. Such experiments are > far from unthinkable. A social movement called "transhumanism" advocates the > creation of a "post human species," which would include using animal genes > in progeny to increase strength or make senses more acute. > ... > Sounds good to me. I could do with eyesight comparable to a hawk and muscles as strong as a gorilla. Fortunately the 'sanctity of life' crap is a Western (read largely US) obsession not shared by the likes of China. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 15 03:08:17 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:08:17 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net: [IP]Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] In-Reply-To: <9BE77785-B1A4-4D2E-9936-DA8AD2AA5C51@mac.com> Message-ID: <200511150308.jAF38be05300@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > > > On Nov 14, 2005, at 2:32 AM, BillK wrote: > > > > They also cite the company's treatment of its employees, whose average > > annual income is under $14,000... > > > > Hmm. I wonder why our ire is not also focused on a government that > a) owns over 40% of the land; > b) takes over 50% of the product of everyone's labor by force... I am far more horrified and > utterly pissed at the government than at WalMart... > > - samantha Some fiend has samantha locked in the back room and is using her computer! Look for a ransom note. Samantha, wow, this is spoken like a true minarcho-capitalist. We are proud of you. Sounds about right to me. Somewhere in this I should point out that I had far worse jobs as a teenager than Walmart. I woulda been pleased to work there. Of course I would know that it was only a springboard, as I knew some of the jobs I had back then were. spike From joel.pitt at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 03:12:23 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 16:12:23 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It is incredibly hard to take them seriously or prevent myself from laughing at them. I guess it is my way of coping over them trying to tell me what DNA I can have in my body or not. In honestly it just makes me fume. Of course, we have to take all this with a rational and straight face in the interests of good PR. -Joel On 11/15/05, Neil H. wrote: > The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior fellow > at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think-tank). > > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-smith_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.2f25c31.html > > Some quotes: > > Look out, America: The trajectory of science is coming into conflict with > venerable human values and even our self-definition as a species, raising > urgent ethical issues that will have to be answered before it is too late. > ... > > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that all human beings have > equal moral worth, regardless of their abilities or capacities. This > objective standard is now threatened by "personhood theory," which holds > that rights only belong to "persons," a status earned by possessing minimal > cognitive capacities. If personhood theory supplants sanctity of life as the > governing ethic of society, it would open the door to harvesting organs from > people like Terri Schiavo or permitting biotechnologists to "farm" cloned > fetuses for use in drug testing or experiments in genetic engineering. > ... > If scientists can insert human DNA into animal embryos, then animal DNA > could just as easily be inserted into human embryos. Such experiments are > far from unthinkable. A social movement called "transhumanism" advocates the > creation of a "post human species," which would include using animal genes > in progeny to increase strength or make senses more acute. > ... > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 03:19:57 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 03:19:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Elon Musk on SpaceX's future rockets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/15/05, Neil H. wrote: > > Elon Musk, the former CEO of Paypal and current CEO of SpaceX, discusses > his work with privately developing low-cost, high-reliability rockets. In > the long term, he intends to build a Saturn V-class vehicle, dubbed the > "BFR," which would be useful for transporting the infrastructure needed to > colonize the Moon and Mars. > > http://thespacereview.com/article/497/1 > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX > > Looks like he's going for an updated Nova http://www.astronautix.com/lvfam/nova.htm Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 15 03:52:21 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:52:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4902d9990511120405l93d571biaac6125698296285@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com> <006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer> <1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> <4902d9990511120405l93d571biaac6125698296285@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On 11/12/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > > I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in > > under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into > > account the buying power of a dollar in that country? > > They don't. And, as you say, taking into account purchasing power > makes those figures more reasonable. Not really. If you've ever lived in a poorer country, you will know that most people simply have way less than in rich countries. Cost of living at their style of living is cheaper, but that isn't by choice. It is because they cannot afford the style of living that many of them would like to be able to afford. Having said that, many consumers in rich countries also cannot afford the style of living they enjoy, and simply pile up debt... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 15 04:02:18 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:02:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > "The Avantguardian" > > > Do you measure your happiness in the saving of a few > > pennies here and there? > > Yes, that is one of the keys of Sam Walton's success, money is the way to > keep score, it lets you know if you're wining or losing the war on poverty. So do you consider Walmart's increasing of the number of people living below the poverty line to be a win or a loss ? > But I was thinking more of the formation of all those third world > sweatshops he encouraged; Employing people who previously used to work for slightly more money, in sweatshops for Walmart's previous competitors, which went out of business due to price pressure... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 15 04:22:09 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:22:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051112040941.48C9257F2F@finney.org> <5366105b0511112032u349117a1yf9860a62c63a27a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Jay Dugger wrote: > > I'd be interested in hearing about other blogs maintained by current > > and former list members. Maybe we could make a list. Mine is at http://blogs.surriel.com/ > More generally, what other social software do you commonly use? For > instance, who else keeps bookmarks on del.icio.us I keep bookmarks on del.icio.us, host a number of wikis (linux-mm.org, wiki.kernelnewbies.org), have experimental anti-spam software (spamikaze.org) and am on IRC all day long (especially #kernelnewbies on OFTC)... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 15 05:21:27 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:21:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Arrow of morality redux Message-ID: <22360fa10511142121s49dc4f2fyb18cc09f739dd8d1@mail.gmail.com> On 11/14/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Jef Allbright wrote: > > > > > I see technological risk accelerating at a rate faster than the > > development of individual human intelligence (which gives us much of > > our built-in sense of morality), and faster than cultural intelligence > > (from which we get moral guidance based on societal beliefs) but > > maybe--just maybe--not faster than technologically based amplification > > of human values exploiting accelerating instrumental knowledge to > > implement effective decision-making which, as I've explained elsewhere > > in more detail, is a more encompassing concept of morality. > > > > I agree that IA is very important. A critical distinction is that this system of intelligence amplification is necessarily composed of multiple independent viewpoints. It is not sufficient to merely amplify the capabilities of a single self--a single set of values--for the same reason that a single point of view, from its own perspective, seems self-consistent at any instant, regardless of its actual correspondence with reality (with what works over increasing scope.) > However it is not obvious that > higher effective intelligence and much more effective decision making > [redundant?] will lead to more moral or wise goals. Yes, those terms seem redundant. I emphasized two terms, but they were (1) increasing awareness of (subjective) values exploiting (2) increasing awareness of (objective) instrumental knowledge to implement increasingly effective decision-making. The "morality" of a choice is always evaluated from a subjective viewpoint because "goodness" is always relative to values which are necessarily subjective. The "wisdom" of a choice is a measure of the (increasingly objective) effectiveness of a moral choice. > It could lead to > much more efficiently implementing the same old goals and > prejudices. Again, the higher level intelligence requires elements providing *independent* inputs to the process. > I still believe it is a net great improvement to > today's insanity as so much of it seems to grow out of rank > stupidity. Yes, there is the wisdom of crowds and there is the mass insanity of crowds, depending on whether the multiple inputs tend to correct each other or to reinforce each other. > If higher intelligence could be more tied to critical > examination of current assumptions and goals and much more aware > choosing of goals then we would see much greater improvement. But > how are you going to get pst the propensity of human beings to ignore > the knowledge they do have and the amount of decision making power > they now possess? Yes, this is why I often refer to the need for a social framework whereby individual subjective values compete on an objective basis and those that survive are promoted to compete at successively higher levels of abstraction. Each level would provide payoffs for participation, somewhat analogous to the way cells benefit from their contribution to the larger organism. But far from resembling the Borg, such a system thrives on diversity to achieve higher level goals in common. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net From femmechakra at hotmail.com Tue Nov 15 06:41:46 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 01:41:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouragedon almost-final version In-Reply-To: <4371179E.9060504@pobox.com> Message-ID: >If I had wanted someone else to read what I had composed then I would have >sent it to them but I sent to it to you to get your direct response. I >wanted your opinion, not anybody else's. If >you think that you are that >important that you need not reply, then maybe what you wrote >about >regarding "trying to accomplish good when the matters occurs, levels of >organization in G.I >and ETHICAL cognitive enhancement must be based upon >popularity report! And in response to: I think it would help clarify your thinking if you used more formal language. One of the reasons formal language is, in fact, widely used for these types of things is because it helps people clarify complex thoughts - both for their own benefit, and to help communicate those thoughts to other people. (Having great ideas is of little use if no one else understands them. It is a fact of life, fair or unfair, that the burden of getting others to understand your thoughts falls more on you than on anyone else, because only you truly control how you express your thoughts.) For example: by mr. whatever >I don't know about "formal language", but I didn't write my post..they >where written quotes >by very intelligent people..so for Mr. whatever to tell me that I need to >use formal language is like >slapping Albert Eistein(or Tesla, Newton, or >ect (Based on my copied info) in the face. >I understood that if what I posted people can't understand well maybe i'm >not posting the right information..or i'm not being clear but I still >wouldn't regard it as using "Formal language". If Mr. Whatever doesn't >understand what I copied, well too bad for him, I understood it, that's why I copied it! I was hoping you did! Thank you for educating me.next time i'll post with people that are more interested in intellectual ideas and not so much as being formal! >From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments >encouragedon almost-final version >Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:24:46 -0800 > >Hal Finney wrote: >> >>Nevertheless I couldn't help recalling our discussion last month >>initiated by Robin Hanson, on the utility of scenario-based forecasting. >>(Thread title was "Inside Vs. Outside Forecasts".) Some of the advice >>in the proposed document amounts to creating inside-type forecasts, >>i.e. setting up scenarios, looking at probable outcomes, and making >>decisions on that basis. The paper we discussed last month shows that >>this forecasting methodology is not very good, unfortunately. It is >>prone to cognitive biases of many kinds. > >Correct. I name also an additional cognitive bias: defensibility. >Cost-benefit analyses aim at warding off anxiety about catastrophe, or >blame in the event of catastrophe. Warding off actual catastrophe is a >great deal harder. You do not realize this until you have written a >careful, elaborate analysis of risks and benefits (such as appears in >http://singinst.org/CFAI/policy.html) and then it turns out that Nature >would have gone ahead and killed you anyway, even though you'd conducted a >cost-benefit analysis. How unreasonable of Nature! What more does She >want from us? At that point I first realized the incredible difficulty gap >between fulfilling a deontological obligation to perform a risk analysis, >and actually avoiding risk. You can always perform a risk analysis - it >requires merely that you quantify your ignorance. There's no guarantee that >survival is even possible - this requires nonignorance, and nonignorance >can be arbitrarily difficult to obtain. It is in the nature of >deontological social obligations that they tend to be fulfillable, which >tells you something about their distance from the real world. > >George Orwell wrote: "In our time, political speech and writing are >largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of >British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of >the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments >which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with >the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to >consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness." > >Humanity can survive the loss of a thousand people, or a million people; it >survives fifty-five million deaths every year. It is therefore appropriate >to trade off the risk of fatal side effects against probable benefits of >life-saving pharmaceuticals, to minimize net casualties. This is the >argument which is too brutal for most people to face: it requires accepting >that every now and then, even after performing a cost-benefit analysis, the >Proactionary Principle will kill a few thousand people - loudly, visibly, >in full public view. The Precautionary Principle kills many more people, >but silently. > >If human beings did not age, but still suffered accidents, we would in no >sense be immortal; we would live only until one of life's many dangers cut >us down. The human species is like an unaging individual human; it has >survived this far only because there has not been *any* significant, >recurring danger of extinction. Once we enter the realm where existential >risk becomes *possible*, it imposes a death sentence on humankind, unless >the window of vulnerability is bounded, and small. No existential risk can >ever be realized, even once. It is as if you did not age, but you were >still vulnerable to all ordinary accidents, and you absolutely had to >survive at all costs. The Proactionary Principle does not inculcate a >mindset appropriate to such a task. It is the creed of someone who can >never really be hurt, as humankind can never really be hurt by a >pharmaceutical mistakenly approved. > >-- >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ >Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From femmechakra at hotmail.com Tue Nov 15 06:46:43 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 01:46:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments encouragedon almost-final version In-Reply-To: <4371179E.9060504@pobox.com> Message-ID: >and in regards to wikipedia..maybe you need to use formal language to get >your point accross:) Anna >From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Proactionary Principle: comments >encouragedon almost-final version >Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:24:46 -0800 > >Hal Finney wrote: >> >>Nevertheless I couldn't help recalling our discussion last month >>initiated by Robin Hanson, on the utility of scenario-based forecasting. >>(Thread title was "Inside Vs. Outside Forecasts".) Some of the advice >>in the proposed document amounts to creating inside-type forecasts, >>i.e. setting up scenarios, looking at probable outcomes, and making >>decisions on that basis. The paper we discussed last month shows that >>this forecasting methodology is not very good, unfortunately. It is >>prone to cognitive biases of many kinds. > >Correct. I name also an additional cognitive bias: defensibility. >Cost-benefit analyses aim at warding off anxiety about catastrophe, or >blame in the event of catastrophe. Warding off actual catastrophe is a >great deal harder. You do not realize this until you have written a >careful, elaborate analysis of risks and benefits (such as appears in >http://singinst.org/CFAI/policy.html) and then it turns out that Nature >would have gone ahead and killed you anyway, even though you'd conducted a >cost-benefit analysis. How unreasonable of Nature! What more does She >want from us? At that point I first realized the incredible difficulty gap >between fulfilling a deontological obligation to perform a risk analysis, >and actually avoiding risk. You can always perform a risk analysis - it >requires merely that you quantify your ignorance. There's no guarantee that >survival is even possible - this requires nonignorance, and nonignorance >can be arbitrarily difficult to obtain. It is in the nature of >deontological social obligations that they tend to be fulfillable, which >tells you something about their distance from the real world. > >George Orwell wrote: "In our time, political speech and writing are >largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of >British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of >the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments >which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with >the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to >consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness." > >Humanity can survive the loss of a thousand people, or a million people; it >survives fifty-five million deaths every year. It is therefore appropriate >to trade off the risk of fatal side effects against probable benefits of >life-saving pharmaceuticals, to minimize net casualties. This is the >argument which is too brutal for most people to face: it requires accepting >that every now and then, even after performing a cost-benefit analysis, the >Proactionary Principle will kill a few thousand people - loudly, visibly, >in full public view. The Precautionary Principle kills many more people, >but silently. > >If human beings did not age, but still suffered accidents, we would in no >sense be immortal; we would live only until one of life's many dangers cut >us down. The human species is like an unaging individual human; it has >survived this far only because there has not been *any* significant, >recurring danger of extinction. Once we enter the realm where existential >risk becomes *possible*, it imposes a death sentence on humankind, unless >the window of vulnerability is bounded, and small. No existential risk can >ever be realized, even once. It is as if you did not age, but you were >still vulnerable to all ordinary accidents, and you absolutely had to >survive at all costs. The Proactionary Principle does not inculcate a >mindset appropriate to such a task. It is the creed of someone who can >never really be hurt, as humankind can never really be hurt by a >pharmaceutical mistakenly approved. > >-- >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ >Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Nov 15 06:53:46 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 01:53:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> It looks like whenever the name Wal-Mart is uttered, it occasions an outpouring of statements so silly as to be childish. Like "money is bad" (was it Stuart who wrote it?). It is purely puerile, and so surprising coming from Stuart who is otherwise quite smart. Or consider this gem: > So do you consider Walmart's increasing of the number of > people living below the poverty line to be a win or a loss ? > Dumb, whoever wrote it. Walmart obviously is not increasing the number of poor people, it is paying them money, not taking it away from them. Anybody with even a modicum of economic sense will see it. I bet the stupid losers who were running around the English countryside three hundred years ago, breaking steam machines, were screaming the same inanities: " 'Tis an Outrage, for the pestilential Engines to rob the honest Countryfolk of their Income, and consign them to the wretched Lives of Vagabonds!" Luckily, the Constables made short work of Nedd and his ilk, so we can now enjoy the fruits of Mechanical Progress. It might be helpful for the Walmart-bashers to try to think about the object of their hate as nothing but a machine for conveying goods from point A to B, like a truck. Obviously, a single truck makes a dozen burro-teams obsolete - but I do sincerely hope that nobody on this list will argue in favor of banning semis and opening the highways to mules and oxcarts. And equally obviously, a faster, cheaper, safer, more reliable truck is always better (and I mean better for everybody, for the whole society, not just its owner) than the older one based on the T-model - and Wal-Mart is better, too, in the economic and moral sense of improving the fulfullment of human aspirations. Wal-Mart is nothing but a glorified trucking business, not a coven of Satanists, nothing worth writing 70+ posts about. Why don't the extropians argue about the Singularity, or methods for interstellar propulsion, or something else that's not wta-talk stuff (i.e. leftist claptrap)? Rafal PS. Here is another piece of nonsense: > Employing people who previously used to work for slightly more > money, in sweatshops for Walmart's previous competitors, which > went out of business due to price pressure... > Tell this to the Chinese peasants who buy their first cars thanks to the massive growth in industrial productivity in part spurred by increased export opportunities to the US. From femmechakra at hotmail.com Tue Nov 15 07:11:58 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 02:11:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051111183009.33827.qmail@web81610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >I thank you for your advice, but I didn't write that formal language. I >just copied and pasted:) >If my copying and pasting where not understandable, I apoligize. Although >I, may have fully >understood, you may have been right by saying; " both >for their own benefit, and to help communicate those >thoughts to other people. (Having great ideas is of little use if no >one else understands them. It is a fact of life, fair or unfair, that >the burden of getting others to understand your thoughts falls more on >you than on anyone else, because only you truly control how you express >your thoughts." >I asked for an opinion from Yudkowsly..and you gave it to me, so I thank >you. But in regards to formal language you will have to debate with the >people I copied and >pasted from..unfortunately you'll have to explain why they aren't >communicating properly:) Anna >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:30:09 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > This is my first publication..i really have no idea what i'm talking > > about!..lol > > I just want an opinion > >I think it would help clarify your thinking if you used more formal >language. One of the reasons formal language is, in fact, widely used >for these types of things is because it helps people clarify complex >thoughts - both for their own benefit, and to help communicate those >thoughts to other people. (Having great ideas is of little use if no >one else understands them. It is a fact of life, fair or unfair, that >the burden of getting others to understand your thoughts falls more on >you than on anyone else, because only you truly control how you express >your thoughts.) For example: > > > A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > computational leverage > >Lose the colons. You're using them to denote association, but it is >better to explicitly state what the association is. Also, note the >object that performs any action. In this case, you might want: > >"I propose a model of mind-body. It is a potential ideal of >computational leverage." > >Once you have it in that form, you can more easily see where more >detail can be added (adding detail being one of the things that will >help clarify your thoughts), or simply restate your thoughts more >directly. For example: > >"I propose a model of the mind-body relationship. Accurately modelling >that relationship can help turn mere computation into true artificial >intelligence." > > > Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties > > of the universe (such as space, time, and number of > > dimensions) derived from modern physics consistency > > arguments. > >Again, formal language: > >"Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe >(such as space, time, and number of dimensions) are derived from modern >physics consistency arguments." > >That second "are" can make more difference than it seems at first. > >And so forth throughout the document. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 15 08:51:09 2005 From: bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk (bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 08:51:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] teaching extropian subjects In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051114090012.07c5ac18@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051115085109.48418.qmail@web26704.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I'd be happy to collaborate in the development of Extropian and General Transhumanist educational / teaching material. December/January *should* be the time of year I get a little more time to work on non day-job projects too. I was thinking along the Modular Subject line that the UKs Open University uses, so that a full Qualification can be assembled using accepted Modules that reflect the personal interests and requirements of the individual students. I must say, 'Masters of Science in Studies of the Future' sounds like an excellent graduate program. I wish there was something similar here in the UK... Julian --- Natasha Vita-More wrote: > At 02:49 AM 11/14/2005, you wrote: > >I've been working on a similar project in the UK > >(although it's been shelved for a few months due to > >day job work pressure). > > > >What we need is a structured syllabus for > >Transhumanist & Extropian flavoured memes. > > I agree in total! I'm finishing up my master thesis > right now and want to > focus on this as soon as possible - that would be in > January. One of ExI's > goals is to offer a course on the future through > Extropy Institute. The > material I have accumulated from my masters degree > is highly relevant for > this (Masters of Science in Studies of the Future). > Most of my work in > this graduate program has been related to > transhumanism in general and > Extropy Institute and the future in particular. > > I'll collaborate with anyone who wants to teach! > > Best wishes, > Natasha > > > Natasha > Vita-More > Cultural Strategist - Designer > Future Studies, University of Houston > President, Extropy > Institute > Member, Association of > Professional Futurists > Founder, > Transhumanist Arts & > Culture > Honorary Vice-Chair, > World Transhumanist > Association > Senior Associate, Foresight > Institute > Advisor, Alcor Life Extension > Foundation > > If you draw a circle in the sand and study only > what's inside the circle, > then that is a closed-system perspective. If you > study what is inside the > circle and everything outside the circle, then that > is an open system > perspective. > Buckminster Fuller > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > "Fahrkarte bis zur Endstation!" ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 15 10:55:06 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 11:55:06 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: riots in France In-Reply-To: <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> References: <200511101735.jAAHZBe15579@tick.javien.com> <003d01c5e6be$815a4a40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <22360fa10511130922u68cd59a4g17a2c03f08836aad@mail.gmail.com> <5C54245E-9B3A-4A3E-99AB-375EA3EA7FC0@mac.com> <1D3D0BF7-0A1D-473C-95AD-E939A764D914@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051115105506.GZ2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:27:54PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > With material plenty do you think this is likely? But wait, I > thoroughly believe in the right to obtain and bear arms. So we may > disagree or which kinds of things are a problem. A nano-factory > cannot produce anything it doesn't have a blueprint for. That is I can readily provide you a blueprint for a desktop isotope enrichment plant. Right to bear arms, sure. Nuclear arms, though? Ecovorous self-replicators? You can't brush off those a la toner wars. > one level of control. Nanofactories could come with certain built-in > restrictions giving another level of control. The problems could Yeah, DRM from hell. > also be addressed by something like the broadcast model proposed by > Ralph Merkle (http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/selfRepJBIS.html). Broadcast isn't a safety precaution. Broadcast is incompatible with locally asynchronous operations anyway. > Generally speaking I am more interested in empowering people and in > fighting abuses they actually do commit than in keeping them > harmless by decreasing their abilities and access. We'll see the same proliferation issues as with nuclear power today, only worse. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 15 17:00:21 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:00:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > John still has not said why it is he believes that a > Wal-Mart market monopoly It must come as quite a shock to Target, Home Depot, Best Buys, Lows, Circuit City, Macy's, Radio Shack and many others in the retail sector to find out that Wal-Mart is a monopoly and therefore despite appearances they so not exist. And I must say that the Extropian List is the last place I'd expect to find a pack of Neo Luddites. > is in in any sense more 'free market' or 'efficient' > than several thousand smaller stores This statement more than any other proves that you have no idea want "Free Market" means. Wal-Mart is more Free Market than ten thousand mom and pop stores because it competed with them in the Free Market and mom and pop lost; perhaps consumers did like the home town values or whatever other bullshit virtues they were supposed to radiate, but they did not like them enough to make up for mom and pop's price gouging. > corporate activity should be judged by benefits > accruing to EVERY sector of society I pretty much agree, the only slight disagreement we have is who should judge a subjective and controversial thing like "benefit". I think it should be judged by workers who vote with their feet and consumers who vote with their dollars. You think it should be judged by Jack Parkinson. > I submit that Wal-Mart does not effectively serve every > sector, in fact it primarikly seves a miniscule portion > of it - the Waltons. Fine, if that's the way you feel then don't work at Wal-Mart and don't shop at Wal-Mart, but what I object to is that you want in effect to force people like me who profoundly disagree with your premise to act the same way you do by shutting down Wal-Mart. You shop where you like, just let me do the same. John K Clark From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 15 17:14:31 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:14:31 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for asuperboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511151714.jAFHEZ6o006461@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Folks, The last paragraph is the best: "All of the natural boundaries are up for grabs. All of the boundaries that have defined us as human beings, boundaries between a human being and an animal on one side and between a human being and a super human being or a god on the other. The boundaries of life, the boundaries of death. These are the questions of the 21st century, and nothing could be more important." Brent Allsop -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 15 17:49:18 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:49:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> > John K. Clark said: > > Wal-Mart is more Free Market than ten thousand mom and pop > stores because it competed with them in the Free Market and mom and pop > lost; perhaps consumers did like the home town values or whatever other > bullshit virtues they were supposed to radiate, but they did not like them > enough to make up for mom and pop's price gouging. Price gouging? I would not have said that. Indeed consumers might not have liked mom and pop's *pricing*, but IMHO mom and pop probably were *not* price *gouging*. When we consider economy of scale, mom and pop were likely doing the best they could. Now, with fuel prices rising in the USA, mom and pop have more appeal. Where's the savings if you have to spend $5 or $10 to get to and from WalMart? I, for one, am doing more shopping locally and on-line, unless I'm aleady near a WalMart. I don't make any special trips to shop there - although I know folks who do. Many of them make a hobby of shopping! ;) They do have some excellent bargains, though, and some things I cannot find elsewhere. Regards, MB From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 15 17:55:28 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:55:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for asuperboy - or a dogboy? References: Message-ID: <017601c5ea0d$df2d2780$160b4e0c@MyComputer> > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that [blah blah blah] It's odd, there is nothing really wrong with the word but it's a fact that I've never seen the phrase "The sanctity of X" used in support of anything I agreed with. Not once. The same is true of "level the playing field" and "you can't cry fire in a crowded theater" and "I believe in free speech but.....". John K Clark From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 15 18:05:13 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:05:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for asuperboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: <017601c5ea0d$df2d2780$160b4e0c@MyComputer> References: <017601c5ea0d$df2d2780$160b4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <47303.72.236.103.28.1132077913.squirrel@main.nc.us> >> The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that [blah blah blah] > > It's odd, there is nothing really wrong with the word but it's a fact that > I've never seen the phrase "The sanctity of X" used in support of anything > I > agreed with. Not once. The same is true of "level the playing field" and > "you can't cry fire in a crowded theater" and "I believe in free speech > but.....". > > John K Clark > > Well said, IMHO! I'm gonna forward it to my family. :) May even want to borrow it for a .sig file. :) I'd be inclined to add "for the children" in that whiney voice that indicates *nothing* to do with children. Regards, MB From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 15 18:07:54 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:07:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051115180754.67409.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Anna Tylor wrote: > >I thank you for your advice, but I didn't write that formal > language. I > >just copied and pasted:) You said it was your first publication. It is not your publication if you did not play any part in writing it. Copying & pasting someone else's words does not make it "your" publication. I'm willing to believe that you made this mistake innocently (as in, you're new to this and didn't know any better), but watch out in the future. C&Ping someone else's work and claiming it is yours - as you did by saying it was your publication - is stealing and plagarism, and many people (especially among those you'd want to read something like this) have very little tolerance for that. Also, it wasn't very formal language, no matter what the source. That was the original problem I was pointing out. You might also want to watch out for what you do pass around: that publication was so ill-formed that some other members of this list were, in private emails, saying I should not respond to a "kook" - as in, someone passing off ideas that can never in fact be reduced to practice, and whose noise does not help anyone make actual progress. I suspect your problem may be more one of inexperience, though: as you gain experience with this sort of thing, you'll recognize when you're faced with these sorts of ideas, and learn why so many people correctly believe that to spend much time on them is a waste of time - and, perhaps, learn how to convert some of them into ideas that could result in actually accomplishing something, which others would be more willing to help with. So...you have made a total of three mistakes here, at least one of which (plagarism) many people would never forgive you for. You are given this chance to learn, so that you never again repeat those mistakes. > >But in regards to formal language you will have to debate with > the > >people I copied and > >pasted from..unfortunately you'll have to explain why they aren't > >communicating properly:) I already explained that. Copy and paste my explanation to them (but don't claim it's yours!) if you want. From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 15 18:46:49 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:46:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <018b01c5ea14$f7b18920$160b4e0c@MyComputer> "M.B. Baumeister" > When we consider economy of scale, mom and pop were > likely doing the best they could. Who cares. Consumers are not interested in excuses and neither am I. Perhaps the extra money they charged went into mom and pop's pockets or maybe it just evaporated due to incompetence and other inefficiencies, it doesn't matter to me. All that matter to me when I buy an ice cream cone is how good it tastes and how much it costs. And, judging from Wal-Mart's victory over mom and pop I am not very unusual in that regard. > Now, with fuel prices rising in the USA, mom and pop have more appeal. I rather doubt you are right but it's the market that decides such things not me. If you are right and the market puts Wal-Mart out of business and mom and pop comes back in a big way you will hear no complaint from me. But remember, Wal-Mart was once a little mom and pop store, they just did things a little more efficiently than anybody else, and with Wal-Mart now out of business there is a big hole in the economic ecosystem that will not stay empty forever. John K Clark From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 15 19:14:48 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 11:14:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for asuperboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: <017601c5ea0d$df2d2780$160b4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051115191448.85591.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that [blah blah blah] > > It's odd, there is nothing really wrong with the word but it's a fact > that > I've never seen the phrase "The sanctity of X" used in support of > anything I > agreed with. Not once. The same is true of "level the playing field" > and > "you can't cry fire in a crowded theater" and "I believe in free > speech > but.....". Just for grins, how's this? In order to better defend the sanctity of our lives, we should develop methods of immortality, and stem to the maximum amount possible humanity's loss of this sacred quantity. To level the playing field among all peoples regardless of genetic heritage or unfortunate accidents, we should develop methods of human augmentation, for instance so that those born blind or who lose their eyes may see again. I believe in free speech, but I believe those who speak against these things are trying to condemn us all to a certain fate just because all of our ancestors shared it (save for certain very recent ancestors, and they view those cases as just a matter of time). Just as you shouldn't cry fire in a crowded theater, you shouldn't spark moral panics just because you personally have an emotional reaction to something: if a thing truly is bad, dispassionately double-checking your gut reaction against the facts will prove it, and perhaps give you better ways to counter it. All of these things beg consideration of the future that all of us share - so if you won't consider them for your own benefit, won't you please at least think of the children? ;) From bret at bonfireproductions.com Tue Nov 15 19:26:42 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 14:26:42 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <31EC2DF1-EF02-4EA2-BB26-77072BFD20D8@bonfireproductions.com> Geez. I hope this fellow never needs any Insulin. Neigh. ]3 On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Neil H. wrote: > The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior > fellow at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think- > tank). > > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/ > stories/DN-smith_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.2f25c31.html > > Some quotes: > > Look out, America: The trajectory of science is coming into > conflict with venerable human values and even our self-definition > as a species, raising urgent ethical issues that will have to be > answered before it is too late. > ... > > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that all human beings > have equal moral worth, regardless of their abilities or > capacities. This objective standard is now threatened by > "personhood theory," which holds that rights only belong to > "persons," a status earned by possessing minimal cognitive > capacities. If personhood theory supplants sanctity of life as the > governing ethic of society, it would open the door to harvesting > organs from people like Terri Schiavo or permitting > biotechnologists to "farm" cloned fetuses for use in drug testing > or experiments in genetic engineering. > ... > If scientists can insert human DNA into animal embryos, then animal > DNA could just as easily be inserted into human embryos. Such > experiments are far from unthinkable. A social movement called > "transhumanism" advocates the creation of a "post human species," > which would include using animal genes in progeny to increase > strength or make senses more acute. > ... > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bret at bonfireproductions.com Tue Nov 15 19:36:08 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 14:36:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for asuperboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: <200511151714.jAFHEZ6o006461@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511151714.jAFHEZ6o006461@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <623D7F11-FB8E-43F3-9F7F-88080E68CAEB@bonfireproductions.com> Not to play 3rd stage guild navigator here, but I see 2+ groups, on opposite sides of this paragraph, each gearing up for the long haul. I don't think both sides are listening. Is this it? Is this the one? The line in the sand? Yikes. I guess we can expect more before we get less. I hope this is generational. There must be enough things out there by now, like (cringe) 'The Matrix' that could pollute enough young on the other side of this statement... the iPod will help. ]3 On Nov 15, 2005, at 12:14 PM, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > > Folks, > > > > The last paragraph is the best: > > > > "All of the natural boundaries are up for grabs. All of the > boundaries that have defined us as human beings, boundaries between > a human being and an animal on one side and between a human being > and a super human being or a god on the other. The boundaries of > life, the boundaries of death. These are the questions of the 21st > century, and nothing could be more important." > > > > Brent Allsop > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 15 19:51:12 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 14:51:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051115141802.07cb5d60@unreasonable.com> M.B. Baumeister wrote: >Now, with fuel prices rising in the USA, mom and pop have more appeal. >Where's the savings if you have to spend $5 or $10 to get to and from >WalMart? I, for one, am doing more shopping locally and on-line, unless >I'm aleady near a WalMart. I don't make any special trips to shop there - >although I know folks who do. Many of them make a hobby of shopping! ;) Fuel prices are clearly a tangential matter in this discussion, but (a) High fuel costs do lead to shopping nearer to home, but also to larger, less frequent expeditions, for which the fuel cost and travel time are compensated for by a reduced total cost and total time. (b) Small stores will often be sited in the vicinity of a large store that attracts customers. They will also, occasionally, combine forces. Amid our miles-long shopping mecca is a strip of three stores side-by-side -- one sells audio equipment, one sells music, and one sells musical instruments. Both are interesting replications of patterns we see in cross-species symbioses in the wild. (c) Fuel prices are not rising in the USA. Gas prices nearby have been dropping daily. They'd hit $3.30 a gallon after Katrina and are down to at or under $2.00. -- David. From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 15 20:46:26 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:46:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051115141802.07cb5d60@unreasonable.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> <6.2.3.4.2.20051115141802.07cb5d60@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <47353.72.236.103.133.1132087586.squirrel@main.nc.us> > (c) Fuel prices are not rising in the USA. Gas prices nearby have > been dropping daily. They'd hit $3.30 a gallon after Katrina and are > down to at or under $2.00. > Lucky you! :) They've certainly dropped here too, but not that much. They're running (last I bought) around $2.25 - $2.50 for regular, which is considerably more than before Katrina. Folks here don't seem to think they're going to stay down either. Among the people I know, many are still curtailing their driving - and their purchasing. Our electric bills have risen and so has garbage collection and furnace cleaning/repairs and home plumbing or electrical repairs - all surcharges because of fuel cost increases. I'd be astounded if those bills drop back any time soon. Regards, MB From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 15 20:53:49 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:53:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <47353.72.236.103.133.1132087586.squirrel@main.nc.us> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> <6.2.3.4.2.20051115141802.07cb5d60@unreasonable.com> <47353.72.236.103.133.1132087586.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051115154815.07c60850@unreasonable.com> M.B. Baumeister wrote: > > (c) Fuel prices are not rising in the USA. Gas prices nearby have > > been dropping daily. They'd hit $3.30 a gallon after Katrina and are > > down to at or under $2.00. > >Lucky you! :) They've certainly dropped here too, but not that much. >They're running (last I bought) around $2.25 - $2.50 for regular, which is >considerably more than before Katrina. Your email address suggests that you are in North Carolina, where the lowest price is $1.93 and many spots are at $2.15. See http://www.northcarolinagasprices.com/ That's not bad, considering that New Jersey and Texas are in the $1.80 range. -- David. From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Tue Nov 15 22:20:10 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:20:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <437A5F1A.6050002@goldenfuture.net> Bear in mind this wingnut is with the Discovery Institute, one of the leading proponents of Intelligent Design. I don't think it should be dismissed solely on that basis, but it's interesting to see how the anti-bioscience movement seems to be branching out. Joseph Neil H. wrote: > The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior > fellow at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think-tank). > > http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-smith_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.2f25c31.html > > > Some quotes: > > Look out, America: The trajectory of science is coming into conflict > with venerable human values and even our self-definition as a species, > raising urgent ethical issues that will have to be answered before it > is too late. > ... > > The "sanctity/equality of life ethic" holds that all human beings have > equal moral worth, regardless of their abilities or capacities. This > objective standard is now threatened by "personhood theory," which > holds that rights only belong to "persons," a status earned by > possessing minimal cognitive capacities. If personhood theory > supplants sanctity of life as the governing ethic of society, it would > open the door to harvesting organs from people like Terri Schiavo or > permitting biotechnologists to "farm" cloned fetuses for use in drug > testing or experiments in genetic engineering. > ... > If scientists can insert human DNA into animal embryos, then animal > DNA could just as easily be inserted into human embryos. Such > experiments are far from unthinkable. A social movement called > "transhumanism" advocates the creation of a "post human species," > which would include using animal genes in progeny to increase strength > or make senses more acute. > ... > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 15 22:22:34 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:22:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051115154815.07c60850@unreasonable.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c@MyComputer> <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> <6.2.3.4.2.20051115141802.07cb5d60@unreasonable.com> <47353.72.236.103.133.1132087586.squirrel@main.nc.us> <6.2.3.4.2.20051115154815.07c60850@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <47429.72.236.102.75.1132093354.squirrel@main.nc.us> > > Your email address suggests that you are in North Carolina, where the lowest price is $1.93 and many spots are at $2.15. > > See http://www.northcarolinagasprices.com/ > > That's not bad, considering that New Jersey and Texas are in the $1.80 range. > > Yes, I see that. It shows the lowest prices in my part of the state are well over $2 and about 35 miles from where I live. In my town the lowest listed right now is $2.25. Regards, MB From aiguy at comcast.net Tue Nov 15 23:32:53 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:32:53 -0500 Subject: Gas Rant was RE: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <47353.72.236.103.133.1132087586.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <00ce01c5ea3c$e74e4190$74550318@ZANDRA2> The only reason oil prices are dropping now is that the government is grilling the oil companies on their obscene profits made this year. Watch the oil companies drop the prices just long enough to get the government off their backs or pay some token windfall profit tax like they did in the 70's. As soon as the heat dies down they'll be waiting for another natural disaster or global conflict as an excuse to hike the price even higher. I wouldn't feel as bad if the oil companies were investing the obscene profits into new refineries or alternate energy research above the obligatory token amount. But to do that would loosen one of the supply bottlenecks and drive their prices down. I believe Saudi Arabia when they say the problem is not them. If they produced more oil there is no capacity to refine it. And if they do get around to building more refineries. Let's not let them get away with building in a hurricane zone. The 30-40 year hurricane cycle is just starting and I have a feeling Katrina was just the beginning. >> MB Lucky you! :) They've certainly dropped here too, but not that much. They're running (last I bought) around $2.25 - $2.50 for regular, which is considerably more than before Katrina. Folks here don't seem to think they're going to stay down either. Among the people I know, many are still curtailing their driving - and their purchasing. Our electric bills have risen and so has garbage collection and furnace cleaning/repairs and home plumbing or electrical repairs - all surcharges because of fuel cost increases. I'd be astounded if those bills drop back any time soon. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From femmechakra at hotmail.com Wed Nov 16 00:55:51 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:55:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051115180754.67409.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >---Adrian Tymes wrote: >>You said it was your first publication. It is not your publication if >>you did not play any part in writing it > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the first time I >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > >In regards to: >>that publication was so >>ill-formed that some other members of this list were, in private >>emails, saying I should not respond to a "kook" - as in, someone >>passing off ideas that can never in fact be reduced to practice, and >>whose noise does not help anyone make actual progress. I suspect your >>problem may be more one of inexperience, though: as you gain experience >>with this sort of thing, you'll recognize when you're faced with these >>sorts of ideas, and learn why so many people correctly believe that to >>spend much time on them is a waste of time - and, perhaps, learn how to >>convert some of them into ideas that could result in actually >>accomplishing something, which others would be more willing to help >>with. > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet the way I >communicate >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. Anyhow >thank you for >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes could you at >least look >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of it makes >sense, it would be much appreciated. These are either my thoughts or >comments about what I thought >I was reading. At this point, at least you will be able to confirm that I >actually am a "kook":) >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of >computational leverage >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an extent that >>it becomes a new mind-body experience >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe (such >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern physics >consistency arguments. >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and graphing, a human >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up with simple, >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have >>huge knowledge and expertise. >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a sparse, high >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized observer >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial frame >properties). >>Therefore the ideal solution is that >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer framework). >A nonphysical mind really does exist >>A nonphysical mind does exist - the internet >It should be amenable to study in the same fashion as other physical >theories that deal with indirectly observable phenomena. >>It would be fun to study with people about your ideas and thougths, people >>that understand. >Since humans are intelligent as well as conscious, >they can predict computational theory to the key which is a requirement for >a solution to the mind-brain puzzle. >Such a theory must address the representational issue of information versus >knowledge (or knowing). >>To give knowledge and receive knowledge is the key >>to unravel the mind-brain puzzle >The problems.... of vision and language understanding, dynamic motion >control, cryptography, and planning far exceed any conventional computing >machine ability. Future scalability limits ultimately restrict how powerful >a computer we can design or build. >>The problems..How to see, talk and understand someone >>that may not speak the same language (refering to train >>of thought). I don't think a computer can do that yet. >It is for these reasons that understanding ordinary human intelligence may >be a prerequisite to understanding consciousness. >>I thought this was pretty straight forward >These strategies for providing extraordinary computing resources might also >provide insight concerning computational processes with properties suitable >for consciousness. >It is possible that systems that exhibit the self organization required for >human "real intelligence" (nothing artificial about it), may exhibit >consciousness. >>With today's extraordinary computing resources we are >>provided with insight from many different point's of >>view, making it possible for anybody to become aware and intelligent. >Physics must ultimately develop a solution for human "real intelligence", >because it represents an evolutionary, complexity increasing informational >process. >>Physics must find a solution on developing a human's >>"real intelligence", by providing knowledge to anyone >>that wishes to learn and being able to express ideas >>and thoughts, this will only help to increase knowledge. >This process must not violate what physicists know about the evolution of >the complexity of the universe. >>Even though you can't change the laws of physics, you >>can find ways to make people understand them. >The question: Consistency frameworks form the physical foundation for >multiple observational viewpoints or different "Points of View". >>The question: Everybody has a different point of view. >Formally defining the interaction between the observer and the "action or >thing being observed" is part of understanding the observation process. >>Isn't interaction the only way to observe each other and learn from each >>other? The rest is relative probably only to me. It's what I like to study and thought someone might have an opinion. I'm using this to help me study. Thanks again and sorry to have bothered you Anna Historically, scientists have prided themselves in their belief that true science occurs when the observer does not participate or disturb an act of measurement. Unfortunately, quantum physics measurements depend on how a question is asked or what question is asked. If an experiment asks particle questions then the results are particle answers. If an experiment asks wave questions then the results are wave answers. Likewise in relativity, asking how much "energy" is in a system is dependent on the observer's velocity and acceleration. The main idea stated in Einstein's relativity: principle was that "all inertial frames are totally equivalent for the performance of all physical experiments."[18] In other words, no matter where you are in space or what speed you are traveling, the laws of physics must be the same. The laws define the possibility that all actions as well as the process of observing those actions are from any vantage point. One major outcome from relativity was experimental proof that the speed of light is constant no matter how you measure it, and no matter what speed you are traveling. In fact, mass, energy, distance, and time have changing values depending on one's speed. Facts: 1) Consistency is more primitive than conservation laws of energy/mass, or space and time 2) Consistency requires light to follow locally "straight line" geodesics (curved spacetime) 3) Consistency mechanisms behave as superluminal synchronization primitives 4) Consistency mechanisms interact outside normal linear time- excluding illegal time loops 5) Increased dimensionality increases degrees of freedom 6) These ideas appeal to researchers studying the mind and consciousness because certain biological[20], psychological[21], parapsychological[22], and meditative research[23] strongly suggest that these properties are exhibited by the mind. An interesting point to note concerning computational leverage mechanisms is that they deal with cosmological issues such as the framework of spacetime and the structure of the universe, and are thus, "outside the box" of what is normal day-to-day physics. This is not surprising given that the evolution of the mind (both collectively and individually) deals with many of the same issues (information, complexity, and energy) as the evolution of the universe. >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:07:54 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > >I thank you for your advice, but I didn't write that formal > > language. I > > >just copied and pasted:) > >You said it was your first publication. It is not your publication if >you did not play any part in writing it. Copying & pasting someone >else's words does not make it "your" publication. > >I'm willing to believe that you made this mistake innocently (as in, >you're new to this and didn't know any better), but watch out in the >future. C&Ping someone else's work and claiming it is yours - as you >did by saying it was your publication - is stealing and plagarism, and >many people (especially among those you'd want to read something like >this) have very little tolerance for that. > >Also, it wasn't very formal language, no matter what the source. That >was the original problem I was pointing out. You might also want to >watch out for what you do pass around: that publication was so >ill-formed that some other members of this list were, in private >emails, saying I should not respond to a "kook" - as in, someone >passing off ideas that can never in fact be reduced to practice, and >whose noise does not help anyone make actual progress. I suspect your >problem may be more one of inexperience, though: as you gain experience >with this sort of thing, you'll recognize when you're faced with these >sorts of ideas, and learn why so many people correctly believe that to >spend much time on them is a waste of time - and, perhaps, learn how to >convert some of them into ideas that could result in actually >accomplishing something, which others would be more willing to help >with. > >So...you have made a total of three mistakes here, at least one of >which (plagarism) many people would never forgive you for. You are >given this chance to learn, so that you never again repeat those >mistakes. > > > >But in regards to formal language you will have to debate with > > the > > >people I copied and > > >pasted from..unfortunately you'll have to explain why they aren't > > >communicating properly:) > >I already explained that. Copy and paste my explanation to them (but >don't claim it's yours!) if you want. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ MSN? Calendar keeps you organized and takes the effort out of scheduling get-togethers. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 16 01:59:19 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:59:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> --- Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Like "money is bad" (was it Stuart who wrote it?). > It is purely > puerile, and so surprising coming from Stuart who is > otherwise quite > smart. > Alright fine. You WalMart-o-philes win. All hail Wal-Mart. Let it supply all goods and services from shoes and food to medical care and gasoline at the cheapest most efficient price. Let it dump unlimited funds into pro-Walmart special interest groups until they control the government too. Then we will have one ubermonopoly that runs the government. That would make it different from the USSR, China, or North Korea how? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 15 18:25:36 2005 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Gregory H Coresun) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:25:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Greetings Natasha and Max Moore and all Extropians, I've just now been able to get into Gregory's computer and discovered to my disappointment that no announcement about Gregory's passing has appeared on your list. On October 13th at 9 minutes to midnight, in a hospice 2 minutes away from Alcor in Scottsdale, Arizona, Gregory released his last breath. Alcor personnel was instantly present to give him the necessary medications, we all transferred him into the icebath standing by his bedside, the thumper was started to circulate the meds and an icebag was unceremoniously tossed on his beautiful face. Then they ran out with him to the awaiting truck, where procedures continued and onto Alcor itself. His was the best suspension ever performed, partly because of the latest cryopreservation chemistry and last but not least because I had airlifted him from his deathbed in the ICU of Dominican Hospital to Scottsdale Arizona, so he was able to die on location! This success has given me great spiritual and emotional relief. I managed to get him what he wanted more than anything: A chance at another life in the future when they may be able to restore his brain and he might have a chance of experiencing the fulness of what it means to be human and explore the possibilities of being transhuman as well. In my experience, he is already traveling the stars! After his considerable energy was released from his body, he has come closer to me than was ever remotely possible during our life together. I grieve to never - in this lifetime - behold his dear face again or wrap myself around the goodness of his generous belly, or listen to his quickwitted mind and let myself be steeped and nurtured in the wisdom of his council. He was my true zen master. As some of you may have noticed, his social behavior of avoidance or dominance and his short fuses were easily displayed. If you carry any resentment or have left over negative feelings about him, I invite you to light a candle or a fire and really get into your hurt and/or angry feelings and generously let it all go up into flames. We don't need any unnecessary conflicts and disagreeable feelings amongst one another anymore. He is completely dedicated to the awakening of the individual out of the trance of socialization, whichever trance that happens to be. 'Examine thyself' and 'Know thy desire', would be the two most important councils he has left us with. And then Accept. What is true right now. Be that. In the now, we find ourselves and each other. No difference. Just all of us wearing so many cloaks of different colors. Each of our unique neuroses variations on a theme, which is essentially the same for all of us. The loss of innocence and the loss of trust. We are, most of us, individually and collectively lost at least to some essential degree, however well hidden. It was always such a delight when some bright spirit, whatever age or gender, caught on to the brightness of his being. Once you knew him and got him and your ego wasn't afraid of him, amazing conversations could be had. Sparks would fly. Insights in the human condition or in some scientific problem would be tossed about like flying darts, for whoever was fast enough to catch them. After one of his speedy quipps, he would look at you to see if you got it, like a little kid: "Did you get it? Isn't it funny?" His innocence! I adore him with all of my being, into forever, into and through some very cold temperatures, upwards and forwards into the future, for better or for worse. We're in this forever, to the best of our ability. One of his (and mine) major motives to come into the future is to make sure humanity never loses the awareness of WWII. We must eradicate fascism (e.i. power over others in some and submission by the many). Within two generations we can be rid of most ills that have bedeaveled humanity since the beginnings of murder and mayhem because of some real or perceived scarcity or worse, because of some right the mighty believe they have over others, whether they be religious, political or business world leaders (=top dogs). In his mind and mine, the struggle for survival can become obsolete. We still have plenty of resources. We begin by making sure that humans only beget the children they really want, can house and feed and educate. Imagine every child growing up according to his/her own innate curiosity, being lovingly and respectfully treated like a real human being and not as 'just a kid'. They will be informed of everything which is happening about them in language of kindness they can understand. They shall not be alienated from themselves and each other. When we learn to live like family, all of us, we will undoubtedly set our hearts and minds to the task of healing the human family and its precious habitat. Especially now, since we are in such a precarious state of balance. I believe we can still turn it around before 2012. But the time is definitely now. I will be glad to receive any writings, musings, reflections on him. Please email me at andreavdl at lovingtruth.net, or here to Gregory's email (how about cc to both, thanks) and I will be glad to put together a memorial website with photographs, his artwork and other creations. I am also planning to create an article for the next publication of Cryonics magazine. Deadline for same is the end of this month! Please email me under subject: Gregory's Memorial. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Andrea van de Loo Truth~Transparency~Trust (831) 458-2925 andreavdl at lovingtruth.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ================================= = Gregory Herald Coresun = = - was - = = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = 831 429 8637 = ================================= From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 16 03:30:16 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:30:16 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready forasuperboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: <017601c5ea0d$df2d2780$160b4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200511160330.jAG3Uoe20617@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John K Clark ... > "you can't cry fire in a crowded theater" ... > > John K Clark If a crowded theater really did catch fire, nobody would cry fire because they were always told you can't do that there. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 16 03:30:16 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:30:16 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <47276.72.236.103.28.1132076958.squirrel@main.nc.us> Message-ID: <200511160330.jAG3Uqe20620@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of M.B. Baumeister > ...I, for one, am doing more shopping locally and on-line... > Regards, MB On-line shopping is something that was mostly left out of this whole discussion. Most US states have a sales tax. On-line companies can set up in one of those states that have no tax. Many manufactured goodies are made in such quantities that the profit margin is down to about 10% before tax. The state of Taxifornia demands 8%, so if the bricks and mortar places match the internet price, it is like the state government saying to them: go ahead and do business, but hand over 80% of the actual profit. We have not discussed how on-line retailers treat their workers or how much they pay, but I suspect in many cases Walmart is a good option for those employees. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 16 03:40:45 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:40:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511160340.jAG3eme21464@tick.javien.com> > Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) > ... > On October 13th at 9 minutes to midnight, in a hospice 2 minutes away from > Alcor in Scottsdale, Arizona, Gregory released his last breath... This was quite a shock. Hara Ra was always a welcome fixture at the local cryo-schmoozes, a big jolly, friendly, funny guy, boisterous, optimistic, forward looking. As an occasional poster to ExI-chat, he was at a couple of the extro-schmoozes, perhaps 3 and 4? I recall his interests being in cryonics and life extension. May we all be inspired by his making the arrangements for cryonic suspension. He will surely be missed by family, friends and even casual acquaintances. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 16 03:46:35 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:46:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051115214437.01d22a18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:25 AM 11/15/2005 -0800, Andrea van de Loo wrote: >On October 13th at 9 minutes to midnight, in a hospice 2 minutes away from >Alcor in Scottsdale, Arizona, Gregory released his last breath. Alcor >personnel was instantly present to give him the necessary medications How wonderful! Farewell, Hara Ra! Damien Broderick [in tears] From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Wed Nov 16 03:49:02 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:49:02 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511151900.jAFJ0Ae17941@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002001c5ea60$b24a4920$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > France) > To: ExI chat list > Message-ID: > <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > It looks like whenever the name Wal-Mart is uttered, it occasions an > outpouring of statements so silly as to be childish. Well that was certainly true of the superficial remarks you made Rafal. Because, if you gave the debate a more than cursory look, you might have realized by now that the economic models we have now are also the models many will advocate for the future. All of this has a direct bearing on the way things might be. I noticed your language included such terms as 'puerile,' 'stupid loser,' and the suggestion of Luddism and ignorance as well as 'childishness.' Not a very mature assessment I would have thought - and more importantly - not a scrap of evidence was supplied! It has been pointed out, and not just by me (if you remove head from sand you might note there are substantial numbers considering these points), that the economic model which is the Wal-Mart style of corporate activity has serious deficiencies in a future context. In particular, it is easily possible to imagine a scenario in which this business model becomes more or less immediately outmoded if nano-manufacturing became possible. BUT... this type of business model does not seem to be something many on this list can evaluate coolly. It's support is almost a cherished belief. This is something I don't understand but am prepared to be enlightened on... Several times I have seen people write here about small business 'price-gouging,' Wal-Mart being 'efficient' and I have also seen 'Mon and Pop' businesses derided as small time and inconsequential. I think these opinions are unsupportable. Because: small businesses with lots of competition can't price gouge, they must compete. And, Wal-Mart to me seems very inefficient once you step away from the corporate to take the national viewpoint. And, Mom and Pop business are surely the 'American dream' in action! So why despise them? So far in this debate, the pro Wal Mart opinions on this list have not been backed up with anything more substantial than blind belief! What is this strange creed? How can people get angry when someone suggests that the dynamics of corporate business can be challenged? I just get the crazy feeling I am talking to hapless victims of propaganda, when I see the derision that is directed towards non-believers... If you want to convince me (and maybe a few others) - then this is the challenge: Demonstrate (don't just sneer or give me another side-stepping opinion piece) exactly HOW Wal Mart is more efficient for America than several thousand smaller stores would be. . And, when I say 'efficient' I don't mean in a company/internal sense - all big companies have a size advantage which leverages their ability to buy and sell. I mean: For the whole of the US. How is Wal-Mart better than the alternatives for America as a whole? I am waiting in anticipation! Jack Parkinson From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 16 05:06:56 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:06:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] History in the making is so bland... Message-ID: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> So, being a resident of Mountain View, I watched the City Council meeting where they were discussing Google's proposal to light up city-wide free Wi-Fi. It was your typical public government meeting - comments by one side, comments by the other, everyone keeping to an enforced schedule. (Someone even protested the cost of the war on Iraq. Dude, wrong forum! Mountain View spends no money there, and has no power to directly influence it. But back to the Google bit...) A few highlights: * The "what about radiation exposure" group was out in full force. But due to the way the meeting was structured, and some foresight by the Google rep and the mayor (who I've met and like - you have to be tech-friendly to get elected around here), every issue they brought up had been addressed before they got to read their prepared speeches. "Place all nodes at least 20 feet away from...?" They're apparently planned to be on 30 foot poles, with radiation exposure at 20 feet away (i.e., 10 feet off the ground directly under them) waaay under the FCC's reccomended guidelines - which, they noted, are what cell phones typically operate at. One council member noted that he'd think there'd be a lot more real data about the problem, given the decades we've been exposing ourselves to far more serious RF sources like CB radio. * There's still room for competition, if we find this service unsatisfactory - this only uses about a tenth of the lightpoles in the city. (It also only reaches 80-90% of the city, for want of PG&E owned lightpoles they can get to in the rest.) * The "competing" offer MV had been considering had been from a company planning a for-pay service over a much smaller portion of the city. The agreement for that had been made over a year ago, and despite an extension, they still have yet to deploy, and were already being investigated for that by city staff. * The proposal passed unanimously, with no need for thought: a few seconds after the call was made, all the vote tracker lights went green simultaneously. And the most interesting tidbit... * On the topic of affordability of hardware, the Google rep said that they're a member of the $100 laptop initiative at MIT. Last I'd heard, they were still hemming and hawing about needing to get things down in price, to a degree that suggested that much development was still needed. If I heard him right, the rep casually mentioned that Mr. Negroponte's unveiling the prototype tomorrow in Egypt. Day-umn but I hope I heard him right! ^_^ From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Wed Nov 16 05:53:34 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:53:34 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511151900.jAFJ0Ae17941@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002b01c5ea72$18e158c0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> > Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:00:21 -0500 > From: "John K Clark" said: > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: <005d01c5ea06$2b4bf9f0$160b4e0c at MyComputer> > > corporate activity should be judged by benefits > > accruing to EVERY sector of society > > I pretty much agree, the only slight disagreement we have is who should > judge a subjective and controversial thing like "benefit". I think it should > be judged by workers who vote with their feet and consumers who vote with > their dollars. You think it should be judged by Jack Parkinson. No, and it's not subjective either! I think it should be done by an analysis of the financial benefit accruing to each sector of society. Eg, How much does Wal Mart return to the community in wages, how much to the nation in taxes, etc. Likewise, on the debit side: How much does it cost. That is, how much financial support does the government provide the company, and how much to the workers on low wages - and finally how much do consumers really save because Wal Mart is more 'efficient' than Mom and Pop..? Then, its a matter of straightforward comparison: Would these figures be overall better or worse in the hypothetical scenario that Wal Mart was replaced by a host of smaller operators? My guess is that smaller operators might well be better. Even if I base this prediction solely on the Wal Mart wealth being in distributed useful usage across a slew of businesses and the fact that those businesses would have to compete in a far more fierce labor market - with far less government assistance. So far no one has even attempted to show that this is wrong. > Fine, if that's the way you feel then don't work at Wal-Mart and don't shop > at Wal-Mart, but what I object to is that you want in effect to force people > like me who profoundly disagree with your premise to act the same way you do > by shutting down Wal-Mart. You shop where you like, just let me do the same. > John K Clark Why do you so profoundly disagree? I'm not suggesting anything heretical surely? Just a look at some basic economic premises that are hardly religious in tone. And concepts like 'efficiency' ARE easily twisted to suit an argument. YOU say (if I understand you right) that 'efficient' means an organisation that can achieve maximum concentration of wealth by keeping production, distribution and selling costs low and selling as high as the market permits. I say on the other hand, that such an organisation is only efficient when considered in isolation. There are other highly relevant factors which can and should be considered before a judgment on real efficiency can be made in absolute terms. For example - taxpayer contributions in the form of government support to support the company are a drag on efficiency, as also are any social security and other government payments that need to be made to the Wal Mart employees as a consequence of the company paying very low wages. On the plus side - you can shop where you want. I'm not trying to force you or anyone else to do anything other than keep an open mind by asking why..? Jack Parkinson From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 16 05:58:14 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:58:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ea72$18e158c0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> Message-ID: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to stop piracy, now it helps virus writers. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D/c/a/2005/11/12/BUG0MFN2SU1. DTL From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 16 06:21:53 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Anna Tylor wrote: > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the first > time I > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet the > way I > >communicate > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other people to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms (literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > Anyhow > >thank you for > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes could > you at > >least look > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of it > makes > >sense, it would be much appreciated. I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added more comments. I shall respond to those. > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > >computational leverage > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > extent that > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among those who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance the mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they are said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly and precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical terms, essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their body. > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe > (such > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > physics > >consistency arguments. > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and graphing, > a human > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up with > simple, > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > >>huge knowledge and expertise. Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the path to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more clearly. (In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only works for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are trying to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. Yes, it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training and experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it is very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of any significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen to and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too inaccurate to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at least to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want to spend their limited time.) Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of the trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very well trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's specialty. Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 year old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said child), for example. > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > sparse, high > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > observer > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial > frame > >properties). > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > framework). Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn to when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it often turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since many pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even though the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such as thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can be found online. An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results (which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic description of the concept. And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do have all the time in the world to give you information, or effectively so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on these things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and you might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's like to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a lot, who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what it's like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing about, but close enough to be relevant) is at http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar lines. I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got other things I need to do tonight. From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 16 06:28:47 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:28:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051116062847.7827.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> My favorite bit: it's even gotten into military computers. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,69573,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3 I can just imagine Mr. Rumsfield (for those outside the US: our current Defense Secretary) giving Sony's CEO a call and politely asking whether he should cancel all DoD contracts with Sony, immediately and permanently, to ensure the security of his computers. The CEO can try to explain things and calm the customer down, but that the threat would at all seem even potentially justified... --- spike wrote: > > This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to > stop piracy, now it helps virus writers. > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D/c/a/2005/11/12/BUG0MFN2SU1. > DTL > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 06:51:11 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:21:11 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <20051116062847.7827.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> <20051116062847.7827.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511152251v30164eb7p@mail.gmail.com> I love the fact that they are now giving people good solid reasons to get Sony published music through other channels like p2p networks. No one in their right mind would stick a Sony CD into a PC ever again. But I've been avoiding all of their products for years. They have this habit of making truly excellent hardware, then rendering it unusuable for all practical purposes due to the myriad truly draconian "drm" technologies they include. You would *think* they would learn, after recently losing a market they used to own (walkmans) to apple (iPod). I always assumed that a large part of that failure was due to the stupid drm crap in their offerings. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 22752 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 16/11/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > My favorite bit: it's even gotten into military computers. > > http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,69573,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3 > > I can just imagine Mr. Rumsfield (for those outside the US: our current > Defense Secretary) giving Sony's CEO a call and politely asking whether > he should cancel all DoD contracts with Sony, immediately and > permanently, to ensure the security of his computers. The CEO can try > to explain things and calm the customer down, but that the threat would > at all seem even potentially justified... > > --- spike wrote: > > > > > This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to > > stop piracy, now it helps virus writers. > > > > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D/c/a/2005/11/12/BUG0MFN2SU1. > > DTL > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 07:02:21 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:32:21 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <200511160340.jAG3eme21464@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <200511160340.jAG3eme21464@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511152302p10b98ba5m@mail.gmail.com> On 16/11/05, spike wrote: > > Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) > > > ... > > On October 13th at 9 minutes to midnight, in a hospice 2 minutes away from > > Alcor in Scottsdale, Arizona, Gregory released his last breath... > > May we all be inspired by his making the arrangements > for cryonic suspension. He will surely be missed by > family, friends and even casual acquaintances. > > spike Speaking as a very casual acquaintance (I only knew him through posts to this list), he'll be missed. His posts were articulate, interesting, and funny. His successful suspension is inspiring though. Too bad we don't have these facilities in Oz. (Hey, you know it'd be great if progress on medical nanotech sped along so that people started being revived in, say 20 years. How annoyed would people be? Science fiction has always given the impression that you become a long range time traveller, going to times so different as to be unknowable, a complete discontinuity. Imagine if you were brought back, and everything was pretty much the same? How ripped off would you feel?) -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 22752 (http://nanowrimo.org) From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 16 07:11:48 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:11:48 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) Message-ID: >Damien Broderick >[in tears] me too. Ciao Hara Ra! Amara From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 16 07:14:15 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:14:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers Message-ID: spike: >This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to >stop piracy, now it helps virus writers. >http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D/c/a/2005/11/12/BUG0MFN2SU1.DTL Here is a more complete summary of Sony's deeds: http://www.boingboing.net/2005/11/14/sony_anticustomer_te.html Amara From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 07:29:20 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 02:29:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <002001c5ea60$b24a4920$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511151900.jAFJ0Ae17941@tick.javien.com> <002001c5ea60$b24a4920$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511152329g29203f2bv41a83e764e3015ba@mail.gmail.com> On 11/15/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > From: Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > > France) > > To: ExI chat list > > Message-ID: > > <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032 at mail.gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > > It looks like whenever the name Wal-Mart is uttered, it occasions an > > outpouring of statements so silly as to be childish. > > Well that was certainly true of the superficial remarks you made Rafal. > Because, if you gave the debate a more than cursory look, you might have > realized by now that the economic models we have now are also the models > many will advocate for the future. All of this has a direct bearing on the > way things might be. I noticed your language included such terms as > 'puerile,' 'stupid loser,' and the suggestion of Luddism and ignorance as > well as 'childishness.' Not a very mature assessment I would have thought - > and more importantly - not a scrap of evidence was supplied! ### I do think that saying "money is bad" is a sign of puerility. I remember myself saying these very same words at age 12 but almost immediately after saying it I changed my mind, i.e. I started growing up. I am not in the mood to search for references on the correlation between being a boy (Latin "puer") and having the beliefs I criticize, so feel free to ignore the statements (although, you could look up the references yourself, too, and see what I mean). ------------------------------- > If you want to convince me (and maybe a few others) - then this is the > challenge: Demonstrate (don't just sneer or give me another side-stepping > opinion piece) exactly HOW Wal Mart is more efficient for America than > several thousand smaller stores would be. > . ### When I suggested thinking about Wal-Mart as a big truck, it wasn't just empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart *is* a trucking company, with outlets. And this is why it is possible to concretize thinking about its efficiency: A large semi is more efficient than a dozen vans when it comes to the transport of a large amount of goods from e.g. Minnesota to Florida. This is so not because it has "bargaining power" over the vans, or can physically push them off the road, but because it can fulfill the needs (e.g. having Land of Lakes butter in Florida) of more people at a smaller overall cost in terms of human effort (fewer drivers, less drag, more durability, less gas per pound of freight) - and that amount of effort finds its true measure in the relative prices of Land of Lakes butter delivered by semi or van. I hope you will not insist that I belabor the obvious fact that a hundred semis make the whole country better off than a thousand vans attempting to perform the same task. I don't need to explain that the 900 fewer drivers needed to haul goods do not become unemployed wretches. I do not need to explain that burning hundreds of thousands of gallons of gas less each year is not impoverishing the roughnecks in Louisiana. I assume this is obvious and incontrovertible. Now, a Wal-Mart is to a dozen mom and pops like a semi to a dozen vans - it doesn't run them off the road, it doesn't do "predatory pricing", it simply does things better in certain circumstances (selling large amount of standard goods in locations with large numbers of customers), and makes the competitors useless. And, just like a semi is better for America than a dozen vans, a Wal-Mart is better than a mom-and-pop, whenever lots of customers desire lots of standard goods. --------------------------------- > And, when I say 'efficient' I don't mean in a company/internal sense - all > big companies have a size advantage which leverages their ability to buy and > sell. I mean: For the whole of the US. > > How is Wal-Mart better than the alternatives for America as a whole? > ### No, no, Wal-Mart is not about "leveraging". Wal-Mart is about bigger trucks, about getting volume discounts overseas, about fanatical attention to detail, discipline, and better business sense. And if Wal-Mart can "leverage" a price cut from suppliers, it's good too: almost all of it will be passed on to consumers, and the couple hundred million that winds up in the wallets of Wal-Mart shareholders is a good price to pay for a lower price. BTW, don't think I am uncritical of Wal-Mart and other large companies: Every company dreams about becoming a government when it grows up. There will be a time when Wal-Mart's competitors catch up with its logistics innovations, get the same discounts and engage in mortal price-combat right next door. Chance is, eventually Wal-Mart will turn to the politicians for protection, will buy laws from them to crush the upstarts. Already there are intimations of things to come, with Wal-Mart putting pressure on politicians to enact laws forcing businesses to provide health plans to employees - of course not because Wal-Mart cares about its employees (it doesn't and it shouldn't, it's a business, not a church) but because this would burden some competitors more than Wal-Mart. Once Wal-Mart becomes a government creature, I will be its implacable enemy but until then, I am proud to say: "I am a friend of Wal-Mart" (and every other great capitalist organization) Rafal From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 16 07:39:43 2005 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 23:39:43 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <485E736B-C04B-4098-A47D-36F39B48191B@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 15, 2005, at 9:06 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > * The "what about radiation exposure" group was out in full force. Also known in the industry as the "Mommies Against Microwaves" contingent. As amusing as they are, they should not be underestimated. Their influence in the more left-wing communities is actually a bit disconcerting and some of it is grotesquely anti-science when it comes down to brass tacks. They have successfully banned RF networking in a few towns in northern California that I will generously describe as strongly sympathetic to New Age hippie causes. Which is great if you believe their claptrap, but a bit annoying if you want to use wireless networking within their jurisdiction. Fortunately, this generally will not fly in Silicon Valley or up on the peninsula as there are *way* too many engineers and geeks living there. The North Bay is an entirely different matter though. J. Andrew Rogers From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 07:43:53 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 02:43:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> References: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511152343r5f197233n53c0d0f45f3fa9a7@mail.gmail.com> I used to shop in government monopoly grocery stores as a small boy, standing patiently for an hour or so in line to buy bread and milk. I have a very personal, seething hatred for government monopolies, the kind of hatred that comes from direct exposure to communism as a child. Trust me Stuart, if Wal-Mart was anything close to a government monopoly, I would be its vocal enemy. Rafal On 11/15/05, The Avantguardian wrote: > --- Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > > Like "money is bad" (was it Stuart who wrote it?). > > It is purely > > puerile, and so surprising coming from Stuart who is > > otherwise quite > > smart. > > > > Alright fine. You WalMart-o-philes win. All hail > Wal-Mart. Let it supply all goods and services from > shoes and food to medical care and gasoline at the > cheapest most efficient price. Let it dump unlimited > funds into pro-Walmart special interest groups until > they control the government too. Then we will have one > ubermonopoly that runs the government. That would make > it different from the USSR, China, or North Korea how? > > From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 16 07:52:04 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:52:04 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> References: <002b01c5ea72$18e158c0$0801a8c0@EF02jack> <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20051116075204.GQ2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:58:14PM -0800, spike wrote: > > This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to > stop piracy, now it helps virus writers. No virus, a DRM rootkit. Classical script kiddie behaviour (lying to its customers until the eagle screams, then releasing buggy patches). I'm quite pleased that all this so nicely backfired on Sony, and has given DRM a bad name in the wider population. > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D/c/a/2005/11/12/BUG0MFN2SU1.DTL -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From deano17uk at hotmail.com Wed Nov 16 10:57:45 2005 From: deano17uk at hotmail.com (dean omara) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:57:45 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dialogue Message-ID: hi my names Dean O'Mara and I'm studding Multimedia design at the University of Huddersfield, England. I'm currently working on my dissertation; working title - Cyber Immortality. And i really interested in Extropy and was just wondering if i could set up a Dialogue with anyone? It would be a great help thanks Dean From bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 16 11:19:16 2005 From: bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk (bluesteel_0 at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:19:16 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Dialogue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051116111916.52396.qmail@web26703.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello Dean, As well as the global Extropy list here, you may like to chat with Extropians and other Transhuman activists in the UK. We have groups both virtual and physical (although our monthly meetings are in London). The best place to start would be to join our UK Extropian/Transhumanist Group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extrobritannia Julian (Director UKTA) --- dean omara wrote: > hi > my names Dean O'Mara and I'm studding Multimedia > design at the University of > Huddersfield, England. > > I'm currently working on my dissertation; working > title - Cyber Immortality. > And i really interested in Extropy and was just > wondering if i could set up > a Dialogue with anyone? > It would be a great help > thanks > Dean > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > "Fahrkarte bis zur Endstation!" ___________________________________________________________ WIN ONE OF THREE YAHOO! VESPAS - Enter now! - http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/features/competitions/vespa.html From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 12:25:57 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:25:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511152343r5f197233n53c0d0f45f3fa9a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60511152343r5f197233n53c0d0f45f3fa9a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/16/05, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > Trust me Stuart, if Wal-Mart was anything close to a government > monopoly, I would be its vocal enemy. > Wow! Rafal chanting the same mantra as Dick Cheney. 'My favorite store!'. Must be something wrong here somewhere. ;) Obviously there is a torrent of Walmart criticism on the web. Every big organization will have critics pointing out their faults. But Walmart is the biggest. Try http://www.tompaine.com/articles/walmarts_free_market_fallacy.php?dateid=20050423 Wal-Mart's Free Market Fallacy Jonathan Tasini April 21, 2005 ------------------------ In the mythical world of the free market?for which Wal-Mart supposedly serves as a shining example?prices for goods and labor should rise and fall based on the magic of the "invisible hand" of market supply and demand. In the nirvana of the so-called free market, workers can sell themselves for whatever the market can bear. So let me introduce you to a place called China. Wal-Mart?in its never-ending quest to promote its heartland, Arkansan family values?is a willing customer of the Chinese labor system, where people work 12- to 18-hour days, earn meager wages and have no days of rest?all for the honor of laboring inside factories full of chemical toxins and hazardous machines, leading to sickness and death at the highest rates in world history. Wal-Mart says its business with China is just a virtue of the free market. ------------------- Back at home, Wal-Mart's free market mantra stops at the water's edge of the public till. By one estimate, Wal-Mart has pulled in $1.5 billion dollars in taxpayer funded subsidies (see www.walmartwatch.com) . And that's at the low end, because subsidies are sometimes hard to track based on the lack of public reporting requirements. Wal-Mart is happy to cash in on government largess like property tax abatements, infrastructure support, free land and just straight-out cold cash?all of which are the antithesis of "free market" ideology. ---------------------- Truth is, Wal-Mart could not survive in a real free market: It would, for example, have to pay Chinese workers more (which would ruin its low-wage business model) and spurn any offers of government subsidies. Indeed, it's fitting that Wal-Mart, the business model fawned over by free-marketeers, exposes the so-called "free market" as a lie, no more than a crude?albeit effective?marketing phrase. --------------------- BillK From femmechakra at hotmail.com Wed Nov 16 15:33:56 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:33:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thank you again for your time, I know that you must be a busy person. I will take your advice and try again >From: Adrian Tymes regarding >I have often found it a >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). This will be very usefull Thank you again Anna >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the first > > time I > > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > >No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet the > > way I > > >communicate > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. > >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other people >to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to >others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > > > Anyhow > > >thank you for > > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes could > > you at > > >least look > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of it > > makes > > >sense, it would be much appreciated. > >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added more >comments. I shall respond to those. > > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > >computational leverage > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > > extent that > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience > >Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. > >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among those >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance the >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new >mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they are >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly and >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical terms, >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their body. > > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe > > (such > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > > physics > > >consistency arguments. > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and graphing, > > a human > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up with > > simple, > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > > >>huge knowledge and expertise. > >Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the path >to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more clearly. >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only works >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are trying >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. > >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. Yes, >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training and >experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it is >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of any >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen to >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained >individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, >as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too inaccurate >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at least >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want to >spend their limited time.) > >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of the >trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very well >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's specialty. >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 year >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said >child), for example. > > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > > sparse, high > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > > observer > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial > > frame > > >properties). > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > > framework). > >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. > >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn to >when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it often >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since many >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even though >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily >used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such as >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can be >found online. > >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic >description of the concept. > >And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do >have all the time in the world to give you information, or effectively >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on these >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ > >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this >alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and you >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's like >to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a lot, >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what it's >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). > >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar lines. >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got >other things I need to do tonight. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft? SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 16 16:52:21 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:52:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><7641ddc60511152343r5f197233n53c0d0f45f3fa9a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <007001c5eace$47815cf0$3b084e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > No, and it's [benefit] not subjective either! Bullshit! You have 2 job offers, job A offers 20% more pay but it would be a long commute to work each day and you don?t like the head of the company very much, job B offers less pay but you could walk to work and the boss there seems like a very nice man. What to do? > I think it should be done by an analysis of the financial benefit accruing > to each sector of society I think you should have the right to decide for yourself which job gives you more ?benefit? and which job to take, you think a third party, some sort of grotesque Financial Benefit Accruing Board should make the decision for you. > Would these figures be overall better or worse in the hypothetical > scenario that Wal Mart was replaced by a host of smaller operators? > My guess is that smaller operators might well be better. Then why didn?t they do better? You talk about a ?hypothetical scenario? but there is nothing hypothetical about it. Wal-Mart DID compete with mom and pop and the consumers DID vote with their wallets and Wal-Mart DID win; and we didn?t need to worry about shadowy government agencies using dubious economic models and subjective judgments about what ?benefits? society the most economically, artistically, morally and culturally. That is far far too much power to have! Oh and by the way, Wal-Mart was once a mom and pop store too. > taxpayer contributions in the form of government support to support the > company are a drag on efficiency I agree, so eliminate any form of government support of the company if there is any, and there probably is; with government so bloated money seeps out of the treasury to anyone who had their hand out, so stop bailing out the employees too. > I'm not suggesting anything heretical surely? Well, what you?re suggesting is certainly 180 degrees away from the original Extropian principles, but ?heretical? gives your words a grandeur they do not deserve; ?juvenile? would be a little more accurate. John K Clark From sentience at pobox.com Wed Nov 16 17:19:03 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:19:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051115214437.01d22a18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051115214437.01d22a18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <437B6A07.1070706@pobox.com> "Farewell?" "Ciao?" What's up with that? I believe the correct expression on such occasions is, "See you later." Unless *you're* not signed up for cryonics, in which case "Goodbye" may be very much appropriate, but you're mourning the wrong person. In an odd way, Hara is safer than we are. His suspension was the best ever done at Alcor. He'll wake up after the crisis is over. Mata ne, Hara. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 16 17:21:48 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:21:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><20051116015919.36018.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com><7641ddc60511152343r5f197233n53c0d0f45f3fa9a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009901c5ead2$44eece60$3b084e0c@MyComputer> Well Billk I see you?ve recommended another web page, this one is blubbering about how Wal-Mart is forcing the poor Chinese to work long hours, ignoring the fact that never in human history have more people advanced their standard of living more quickly than what we are observing right now in China. And this idiot wants it stopped! Billk, it?s very nice that you?ve learned how to use a search engine and we?re all very proud of you for that, but the thing is, the last website you recommended was run by certified loon Lyndon Larouche and now you give us this trash. Have you no decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency? John K Clark From bret at bonfireproductions.com Wed Nov 16 17:45:19 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:45:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <88E01503-D742-4E6A-9B66-079F98586B0A@bonfireproductions.com> Hi Andrea, I never had the pleasure of meeting Hara Ra, but I do have a fond memory from many years ago. Back when you had perhaps three sources of computer entertainment: games you wrote yourself, games you bought in plastic baggies (on audio cassettes) or games you obtained on paper in the likes of Byte magazine. I spent hours as a child keyboarding all of _Hunt the Wumpus_ so that I could marvel at the spelunking adventure, and try to get that elusive Wumpus. Years later working in education/it when we were hit with an unrealistic request, we would refer to the task as a wiley Wumpus. Each of us knew what that meant. I even put, in my list of most favorite games ever, _Hunt the Wumpus_ as my first entry when I compiled the list a few years ago. I am very happy to hear that Hara will be 'going forward', and will thank him one day personally for his influence. Perhaps we can all break bread together some time. If you do put a page up, or have other links to link to in regard to Hara Ra and the Wumpus, please let us know - right now I simply point to the BAF's guide at http://www.wurb.com/if/game/442 And thank you for posting, Bret Kulakovich On Nov 15, 2005, at 1:25 PM, Gregory H Coresun wrote: > Greetings Natasha and Max Moore and all Extropians, > > I've just now been able to get into Gregory's computer and > discovered to my disappointment that no announcement about > Gregory's passing has appeared on your list. > > On October 13th at 9 minutes to midnight, in a hospice 2 minutes > away from Alcor in Scottsdale, Arizona, Gregory released his last > breath. Alcor personnel was instantly present to give him the > necessary medications, we all transferred him into the icebath > standing by his bedside, the thumper was started to circulate the > meds and an icebag was unceremoniously tossed on his beautiful > face. Then they ran out with him to the awaiting truck, where > procedures continued and onto Alcor itself. His was the best > suspension ever performed, partly because of the latest > cryopreservation chemistry and last but not least because I had > airlifted him from his deathbed in the ICU of Dominican Hospital to > Scottsdale Arizona, so he was able to die on location! This success > has given me great spiritual and emotional relief. I managed to get > him what he wanted more than anything: A chance at another life in > the future when they may be able to restore his brain and he might > have a chance of experiencing the fulness of what it means to be > human and explore the possibilities of being transhuman as well. > > In my experience, he is already traveling the stars! After his > considerable energy was released from his body, he has come closer > to me than was ever remotely possible during our life together. > > I grieve to never - in this lifetime - behold his dear face again > or wrap myself around the goodness of his generous belly, or listen > to his quickwitted mind and let myself be steeped and nurtured in > the wisdom of his council. He was my true zen master. > > As some of you may have noticed, his social behavior of avoidance > or dominance and his short fuses were easily displayed. If you > carry any resentment or have left over negative feelings about him, > I invite you to light a candle or a fire and really get into your > hurt and/or angry feelings and generously let it all go up into > flames. We don't need any unnecessary conflicts and disagreeable > feelings amongst one another anymore. > > He is completely dedicated to the awakening of the individual out > of the trance of socialization, whichever trance that happens to > be. 'Examine thyself' and 'Know thy desire', would be the two most > important councils he has left us with. And then Accept. What is > true right now. Be that. In the now, we find ourselves and each > other. No difference. Just all of us wearing so many cloaks of > different colors. Each of our unique neuroses variations on a > theme, which is essentially the same for all of us. The loss of > innocence and the loss of trust. We are, most of us, individually > and collectively lost at least to some essential degree, however > well hidden. > > It was always such a delight when some bright spirit, whatever age > or gender, caught on to the brightness of his being. Once you knew > him and got him and your ego wasn't afraid of him, amazing > conversations could be had. Sparks would fly. Insights in the human > condition or in some scientific problem would be tossed about like > flying darts, for whoever was fast enough to catch them. After one > of his speedy quipps, he would look at you to see if you got it, > like a little kid: "Did you get it? Isn't it funny?" His innocence! > > I adore him with all of my being, into forever, into and through > some very cold temperatures, upwards and forwards into the future, > for better or for worse. We're in this forever, to the best of our > ability. > > One of his (and mine) major motives to come into the future is to > make sure humanity never loses the awareness of WWII. We must > eradicate fascism (e.i. power over others in some and submission by > the many). Within two generations we can be rid of most ills that > have bedeaveled humanity since the beginnings of murder and mayhem > because of some real or perceived scarcity or worse, because of > some right the mighty believe they have over others, whether they > be religious, political or business world leaders (=top dogs). > > In his mind and mine, the struggle for survival can become > obsolete. We still have plenty of resources. We begin by making > sure that humans only beget the children they really want, can > house and feed and educate. Imagine every child growing up > according to his/her own innate curiosity, being lovingly and > respectfully treated like a real human being and not as 'just a > kid'. They will be informed of everything which is happening about > them in language of kindness they can understand. They shall not be > alienated from themselves and each other. When we learn to live > like family, all of us, we will undoubtedly set our hearts and > minds to the task of healing the human family and its precious > habitat. Especially now, since we are in such a precarious state of > balance. I believe we can still turn it around before 2012. But the > time is definitely now. > > I will be glad to receive any writings, musings, reflections on > him. Please email me at andreavdl at lovingtruth.net, or here to > Gregory's email (how about cc to both, thanks) and I will be glad > to put together a memorial website with photographs, his artwork > and other creations. I am also planning to create an article for > the next publication of Cryonics magazine. Deadline for same is the > end of this month! Please email me under subject: Gregory's Memorial. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Andrea van de Loo > Truth~Transparency~Trust > (831) 458-2925 > andreavdl at lovingtruth.net > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > ================================= > = Gregory Herald Coresun = > = - was - = > = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = > = harara at sbcglobal.net = > = 831 429 8637 = > ================================= > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From hibbert at mydruthers.com Wed Nov 16 17:50:51 2005 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:50:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] List member blogs Message-ID: <437B717B.4060408@mydruthers.com> > Does Marc Steigler blog anywhere? Nope. If you want an update on his whereabouts, he's spending half-time at home in Arizona, and half-time working on security at HP Labs (and renting my spare bedroom.) Chris -- I think that, for babies, every day is first love in Paris. Every wobbly step is skydiving, every game of hide and seek is Einstein in 1905.--Alison Gopnik (http://edge.org/q2005/q05_9.html#gopnik) Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://pancrit.org From jay.dugger at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 19:20:51 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:20:51 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> On 11/15/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: [snip] > * On the topic of affordability of hardware, the Google rep said that > they're a member of the $100 laptop initiative at MIT. Last I'd > heard, they were still hemming and hawing about needing to get things > down in price, to a degree that suggested that much development was > still needed. > > If I heard him right, the rep casually mentioned that Mr. > Negroponte's unveiling the prototype tomorrow in Egypt. > This matches Papert's comments yesterday on PRI's "The World" radio show. Now doubt any announcement will show up on /., digg, del.icio.us/popular, etc. So--any suggestion on how to handle the inevitable comments about why this isn't being done for every single child in ? -- Jay Dugger http://www.redcross.org Please donate if you can. From jay.dugger at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 19:38:25 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:38:25 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511152302p10b98ba5m@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051115084406.02e9ce48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <200511160340.jAG3eme21464@tick.javien.com> <710b78fc0511152302p10b98ba5m@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5366105b0511161138o626c7c90v4673aef8dbabd25b@mail.gmail.com> [snip] > (Hey, you know it'd be great if progress on medical nanotech sped > along so that people started being revived in, say 20 years. How > annoyed would people be? [snip] I might feel some surprise, but no annoyance. Delight to return to life after cryonic preservation would probably overwhelm all other emotion. My sympathy for Greg's survivors, and my best wishes for his eventual revival. -- Jay Dugger http://del.icio.us/tags/charity Please donate if you can. From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 16 19:41:37 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:41:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051116194137.92571.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jay Dugger wrote: > So--any suggestion on how to handle the > inevitable comments about why this isn't being done for every single > child in ? If is a foreign country: among the responsibilities of a country's government is to invest in its people, and this is cheap enough that even poor third world countries should be able to do it. So why don't you ask them why they're failing to invest in this manner? (And find out, in many cases, that their own government is often the main reason this isn't being done, wanting to keep its people repressed and its elites wealthy - for the wise-acres, to a far greater degree than any Western government is presently attempting.) If is somewhere else within your nation: same argument, but apply it to the local government. In the case of a different US state, for example, the state government. (One won't usually find deliberate repression, and perhaps this is something that most industrialized countries could afford for their own children. But one might run into other obstacles.) If is your own community...well, at least in my case, that might actually happen - for the small fraction of children who do not have access to personal computers already. (Though it may be debated if we need to go that far, given the computers that are already publically available for these types of cases.) At the very least, local governments around here would be willing to listen if someone (like, say, the person suggesting it) proposed it to them. Your answers may vary depending on where you live. From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 16 19:55:14 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 20:55:14 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051116195514.GC2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 01:20:51PM -0600, Jay Dugger wrote: > This matches Papert's comments yesterday on PRI's "The World" radio > show. Now doubt any announcement will show up on /., digg, > del.icio.us/popular, etc. So--any suggestion on how to handle the > inevitable comments about why this isn't being done for every single > child in ? Because they already have access to dead tree textbooks? Giving unsupervised kids computers is worse than useless: it correlates with poor educational achievement. With a proper curriculum and support from (trained! and motivated!) teachers portable computers can be a wonderful tool. And of course we need educational software which just isn't there. Giving poor students laptop makes sense because it saves on textbooks. I understand some U.S. schools issued their students iBooks for the same reason. (I still don't get why they turned down Joabses free OS X offer. I just hope their second choice was Linux). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 16 20:17:56 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:17:56 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) Message-ID: Eliezer: >"Farewell?" "Ciao?" What's up with that? >I believe the correct expression on such occasions is, "See you later." I'll pass on the 'correct expression' admonishment, but you are right, Eliezer, the it's better not to use words indicating finality. 'Ciao' like 'aloha' means both goodbye and hello, and is usually used in colloquial speech as in "see you later" (a presto). Also in the Venetian dialect means: 'your servant' (servo vostro)). So it seems ok here. Amara From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 16 21:32:33 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:32:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <437B6A07.1070706@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20051116213233.74435.qmail@web60011.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote: > "Farewell?" "Ciao?" What's up with that? > > I believe the correct expression on such occasions > is, "See you later." > Unless *you're* not signed up for cryonics, in > which case "Goodbye" > may be very much appropriate, but you're mourning > the wrong person. > > In an odd way, Hara is safer than we are. His > suspension was the best > ever done at Alcor. He'll wake up after the crisis > is over. Bingo! "See you later" indeed. Terminal illness with a reasonably predictable course is a winning lottery ticket. It allows you to get a top quality suspension,... IF YOU PLAN WELL. Congatulations to Hara. Best, Jeff Davis Although no one can quantify the probability of cryonics working, I estimate it is at least 90% -- and certainly nobody can say it is zero. Sir Arthur C. Clarke --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote: > "Farewell?" "Ciao?" What's up with that? > > I believe the correct expression on such occasions > is, "See you later." > Unless *you're* not signed up for cryonics, in > which case "Goodbye" > may be very much appropriate, but you're mourning > the wrong person. > > In an odd way, Hara is safer than we are. His > suspension was the best > ever done at Alcor. He'll wake up after the crisis > is over. > > Mata ne, Hara. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky > http://singinst.org/ > Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for > Artificial Intelligence > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From riel at surriel.com Wed Nov 16 22:01:55 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:01:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > So do you consider Walmart's increasing of the number of > > people living below the poverty line to be a win or a loss ? > > Dumb, whoever wrote it. Walmart obviously is not increasing the number > of poor people, it is paying them money, not taking it away from them. > Anybody with even a modicum of economic sense will see it. Like the folks at Berkeley, who quantified some of the disadvantages of Wal-Mart economy: http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf > Wal-Mart is nothing but a glorified trucking business, I'm not arguing with that. What I object to is that Wal-Mart is introducing socialism through the back door, by underpaying its workers so badly that they have to rely on government help to make ends meet. This is a travesty of capitalism. To quote some figures from the Berkeley paper: - The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care than the average for families of all large retail employees. - The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance programs (such as food stamps, etc) than the average for families of all large retail employees. Now you tell me how increasing the reliance of workers on government assistance is good capitalism. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Wed Nov 16 22:12:43 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:12:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511152329g29203f2bv41a83e764e3015ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511151900.jAFJ0Ae17941@tick.javien.com> <002001c5ea60$b24a4920$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511152329g29203f2bv41a83e764e3015ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Once Wal-Mart becomes a government creature, I will be its implacable > enemy Let me cite the Berkeley paper again: "We find that overall, families of California Wal-Mart workers rely heavily on public safety net programs. We estimate the total cost to the public for public assistance to Wal-Mart workers at $86 million a year." "the report estimates that a typical 200-employee Wal-Mart store may cost federal taxpayers $420,750 a year - about $2,103 per employee" http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf > but until then, I am proud to say: > > "I am a friend of Wal-Mart" With this much government support, how is Wal-Mart not a "government creature" ? -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Wed Nov 16 22:21:36 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:21:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> References: <200511160558.jAG5wke01791@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, spike wrote: > This is a hell of a note. Sony wrote a virus to stop piracy, ... which, ironically, seems to breach the copyright of the MP3 encoder Lame, which appears to have been included in the root kit without abiding by the license: http://www.dewinter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=215 Sony's software appears to be "piracy software", not anti-piracy ;) -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 22:52:48 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:52:48 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> On 11/16/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > > So do you consider Walmart's increasing of the number of > > > people living below the poverty line to be a win or a loss ? > > > > Dumb, whoever wrote it. Walmart obviously is not increasing the number > > of poor people, it is paying them money, not taking it away from them. > > Anybody with even a modicum of economic sense will see it. > > Like the folks at Berkeley, who quantified some of the > disadvantages of Wal-Mart economy: > > http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf ### I don't read propaganda from the Socialist Republic of Berkeley ------------------------------ > > > Wal-Mart is nothing but a glorified trucking business, > > I'm not arguing with that. > > What I object to is that Wal-Mart is introducing socialism > through the back door, by underpaying its workers so badly > that they have to rely on government help to make ends meet. > This is a travesty of capitalism. > > To quote some figures from the Berkeley paper: > - The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize > an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health > care than the average for families of all large retail > employees. > - The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated > 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance > programs (such as food stamps, etc) than the average for > families of all large retail employees. > > Now you tell me how increasing the reliance of workers on > government assistance is good capitalism. ### Sure, providing government assistance is stupid socialism. Using it to boost your bottom line is however good business sense. You see the tension there, right? The meaning of collective action differs from the meaning of private responses to it. A collective action makes it useful and remunerative for individuals to act in a destructive manner. Walmart is not underpaying workers, it simply avails itself of the artificially increased supply of job applicants willing to work for low wages. If the government didn't give out money for nothing, Walmart would be paying a little bit more (it would be also probably taxed less), and job applicants would demand more money, knowing that they won't be getting any from Uncle Sam. In fact, government assistance programs are the cause of low wages. As long as Wal-Mart is not actively influencing the government to provide assistance, they are not the guilty party. It's the same with Social Security - I feel that my being forced to pay for the SS is wrong, and a humongous waste of money but, once I am retired, I won't relinquish any SS payments due me, on moral grounds. That is, if the SS still has money left. The correct response to government stupidity is to oppose government stupidity (i.e. government assistance programs), not to go on bashing honest businessmen. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Nov 16 23:08:50 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:08:50 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <200511151900.jAFJ0Ae17941@tick.javien.com> <002001c5ea60$b24a4920$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511152329g29203f2bv41a83e764e3015ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511161508o30f544abi34a9101b9d1e9148@mail.gmail.com> On 11/16/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > With this much government support, how is Wal-Mart not a > "government creature" ? ### If I cash a Social Security check, it doesn't make me a government creature. I always vote against more spending, and I never lobby for more. Only if I demand support (for myself or others), do I become a vassal of the state. Rafal From dharris234 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 16 23:25:09 2005 From: dharris234 at mindspring.com (David Harris) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 23:25:09 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-transhumanist op-ed: Is the world ready for a superboy - or a dogboy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <437BBFD5.1090306@mindspring.com> The Discovery Institute (http://www.discovery.org/) is in Southern Caliornia and is the institution that brought us the concept of "Intelligent Design". The ACLU, in the Dover, Pennsylvania, school board case, points out that Intelligent Design seems to be a way of avoiding the word "God" in what otherwise looks like Creationism, which has been kept out of schools by court decisions on separation of church and state. The Discovery Institute folks are responsible for the "Wedge strategy" (http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html), a plan to integrate Intelligent Design into science classes and gradually separate popular thinking into a choice between God and materialism/evolution/science. To many religions, that is a needlessly narrow choice. I'm working on an essay suggesting that the border between science and supernatural religions can and should be drawn somewhat differently than current usage. I've been doing the computer work for Darwin Day Celebration (http://DarwinDay.org), very much the opposite of the Discovery Institute, except they have much more money and we have real science on our side. We promote Darwin's birthday ("Darwin Day") as a celebration of science and humanity, much like "Newtonmas" in spirit. - David Harris, Palo Alto, California Neil H. wrote: > The Dallas Morning News has an anti-transhumanist op-ed by a senior > fellow at the Discovery Institute (a conservative Christian think-tank). ... From riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 17 00:29:21 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:29:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <20051116195514.GC2249@leitl.org> References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> <20051116195514.GC2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: > (I still don't get why they turned down Joabses free OS X offer. > I just hope their second choice was Linux). I know some of the people working on software for the $100 laptops, and I am pretty sure that OS X will not run on the (very) limited hardware you can build for that money. And yes, it will be a modified Linux system. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 17 02:46:41 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:46:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Just to cap this off: Sony's issued a recall of all affected CDs. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69590,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4 From dmasten at piratelabs.org Thu Nov 17 02:50:25 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:50:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1132195825.3590.68.camel@dmlap> On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 17:01 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > Like the folks at Berkeley, who quantified some of the > disadvantages of Wal-Mart economy: > > http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf This "paper" is pure propaganda hidden behind the facade of an academic paper. The first and most egregious mistake is the apparent assumption that if Wal*Mart did not exist, then the employees would be working for better wages and benefits. If we make the opposite (and nearly as bad) assumption that instead all Wal*Mart employees would not be employed at all, then Wal*Mart has been to the benefit of California public assistance programs to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Dave From riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 17 03:24:15 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 22:24:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### Sure, providing government assistance is stupid socialism. Using > it to boost your bottom line is however good business sense. You see > the tension there, right? > The correct response to government stupidity is to oppose government > stupidity (i.e. government assistance programs), Absolutely. This is why everybody should oppose walmarts in their towns - there is no reason why my tax money should be spent subsidizing one of this country's most profitable businesses. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Thu Nov 17 03:41:05 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:41:05 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Rafal Smigrodzki said: > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > Jack Parkinson wrote" >> If you want to convince me (and maybe a few others) - then this is the >> challenge: Demonstrate (don't just sneer or give me another side-stepping >> opinion piece) exactly HOW Wal Mart is more efficient for America than >> several thousand smaller stores would be. > > ### When I suggested thinking about Wal-Mart as a big truck, it wasn't > just empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart *is* a trucking company, with outlets. > And this is why it is possible to concretize thinking about its > efficiency: A large semi is more efficient than a dozen vans when it > comes to the transport of a large amount of goods from e.g. Minnesota > to Florida. This is so not because it has "bargaining power" over the > vans, or can physically push them off the road, but because it can > fulfill the needs (e.g. having Land of Lakes butter in Florida) of > more people at a smaller overall cost in terms of human effort (fewer > drivers, less drag, more durability, less gas per pound of freight) - > and that amount of effort finds its true measure in the relative > prices of Land of Lakes butter delivered by semi or van. > Once again you have delivered an opinion piece without a shred of evidence. Using your logic I can be sure that elephants are more efficient than dogs, and maybe a big SUV is more efficient than a small car... But you did not answer the question at all. I put it to you (several times) that Wal Mart is a less efficient producer of national wealth - in overall financial terms -than the small business alternatives I proposed. But, you apparently cannot argue this point other than to give me one statement of belief after another. Maybe you are just wrong? > Once Wal-Mart becomes a government creature, I will be its implacable > enemy but until then, I am proud to say: > > "I am a friend of Wal-Mart" > You are indeed a good friend of Wal-Mart but why? This quote via a private email from Mike Lorrey: "This company has, as a corporate policy, an employee handbook that specifically teaches employees how to apply for welfare, medicare, section 8 housing, and other government entitlements, AS IF SUCH THINGS ARE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. Walmart is thus externalizing its labor costs onto the taxpayer." Wal Mart is directly subsidised to the tune of perhaps US $1.5 billion - it exploits welfare payments as a matter of course to compensate for it's poor recompense of employees - and you call this 'efficient!' Wal-Marts political links and political activities are well documented. If obtaining this level of support is not being 'a government creature' then what is? Jack Parkinson From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Thu Nov 17 03:58:10 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:58:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: "John K Clark" > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in >> > Jack Parkinson > >> Would these figures be overall better or worse in the hypothetical >> scenario that Wal Mart was replaced by a host of smaller operators? >> My guess is that smaller operators might well be better. > John said: > Then why didn't they do better? You talk about a "hypothetical scenario" > but > there is nothing hypothetical about it. Wal-Mart DID compete with mom and > pop and the consumers DID vote with their wallets and Wal-Mart DID win; > and > we didn't need to worry about shadowy government agencies using dubious > economic models and subjective judgments about what "benefits" society the > most economically, artistically, morally and culturally. That is far far > too > much power to have! This whole response of yours is one failure after another to answer the question I posed. I don't MIND discussing how Wal Mart got ahead of the pack - but what is relevant here is: Is their business model efficient or not? I am saying here and now it is not. You are giving me a lot of peripheral, diversionary, incidental remarks - like the 'points' below and above) and pointedly failing to address the question. > > Oh and by the way, Wal-Mart was once a mom and pop store too. > >> taxpayer contributions in the form of government support to support the >> company are a drag on efficiency > John said: > I agree, so eliminate any form of government support of the company if > there > is any, and there probably is; with government so bloated money seeps out > of > the treasury to anyone who had their hand out, so stop bailing out the > employees too. You agree? So what you are now saying in effect is that your previous argument holds no water and can be set aside? A simple "Excuse me, I was wrong - I didn't check the facts" would suffice. > Well, what you're suggesting is certainly 180 degrees away from the > original > Extropian principles, but "heretical" gives your words a grandeur they do > not deserve; "juvenile" would be a little more accurate. > John K Clark Really? And I suppose you can explain/justify these remarks as well? Jack Parkinson From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 17 04:00:32 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 20:00:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) In-Reply-To: <437B6A07.1070706@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200511170400.jAH40pe10263@tick.javien.com> Well spoken Eliezer. Incidently, he told me that Hara Ra is one name, even tho it has a space in it. I don't see why it couldn't be shortened, as we might say Eli, but he said it was Hara Ra. {8^] spi > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eliezer S. Yudkowsky > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 9:19 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gregory's Passing (Hara Ra) > > "Farewell?" "Ciao?" What's up with that? > ... > > In an odd way, Hara is safer than we are. His suspension was the best > ever done at Alcor. He'll wake up after the crisis is over. > > Mata ne, Hara. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 04:54:41 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 15:24:41 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511162054v59366c2cp@mail.gmail.com> On 17/11/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Just to cap this off: Sony's issued a recall of all affected CDs. > > http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69590,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > Some people will keep theirs, the software is useful. For instance, people who want to hack Worlds of Warcraft are using it to hide their hacks: http://online.securityfocus.com/brief/34 -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 24517 (http://nanowrimo.org) From outlawpoet at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 05:00:51 2005 From: outlawpoet at gmail.com (justin corwin) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:00:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> I'm forwarding this news item from my boss to this list because it seems he didn't post it here. It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that there should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to join a project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to do this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. Here's his original message, and a link to the current news item on our site: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Peter Voss Date: Nov 11, 2005 7:37 AM Subject: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent To: agi at v2.listbox.com a2i2 is still looking for additional team members. http://adaptiveai.com/news/index.htm Towards Increased Intelligence! Peter Voss Adaptive A.I. Inc ________________________________ -- Justin Corwin outlawpoet at hell.com http://outlawpoet.blogspot.com http://www.adaptiveai.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 05:10:06 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 15:40:06 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511162110r49cf65bam@mail.gmail.com> On 17/11/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Just to cap this off: Sony's issued a recall of all affected CDs. > > http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69590,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > But don't use their removal software, it creates a much worse security problem on your machine. http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20051116/tc_cmp/173603259 -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 24517 (http://nanowrimo.org) From eugen at leitl.org Thu Nov 17 07:47:57 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:47:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> <20051116195514.GC2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051117074757.GU2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 07:29:21PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > I know some of the people working on software for the > $100 laptops, and I am pretty sure that OS X will not > run on the (very) limited hardware you can build for > that money. These things can be eventually almost free. Imagine a few mm thick sandwich of OLED Display|Computer|Battery|PV cell, printed in organic/polymer electronics. A low power version could use electronic paper and MRAM logic. > And yes, it will be a modified Linux system. All is good, then. Zero proprietary components. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From alex at ramonsky.com Thu Nov 17 09:00:06 2005 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:00:06 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dialogue References: Message-ID: <437C4696.7000905@ramonsky.com> Hi Dean, If you want to chat about things cyborg, techy etc, and you have a zany sense of humor, try: http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/bavariancyclistssubaqua/ Don't worry we have no bicycles, and are not Bavarian. Best, Alex Ramonsky ****************** dean omara wrote: > hi > my names Dean O'Mara and I'm studding Multimedia design at the > University of Huddersfield, England. > > I'm currently working on my dissertation; working title - Cyber > Immortality. And i really interested in Extropy and was just wondering > if i could set up a Dialogue with anyone? > It would be a great help > thanks > Dean > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From pharos at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 09:51:57 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:51:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: History in the making is so bland... In-Reply-To: <20051117074757.GU2249@leitl.org> References: <20051116050656.93469.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5366105b0511161120h3205a352td436b8ece2bbfaaa@mail.gmail.com> <20051116195514.GC2249@leitl.org> <20051117074757.GU2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/17/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 07:29:21PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > I know some of the people working on software for the > > $100 laptops, and I am pretty sure that OS X will not > > run on the (very) limited hardware you can build for > > that money. > > These things can be eventually almost free. > Imagine a few mm thick sandwich of > OLED Display|Computer|Battery|PV cell, printed > in organic/polymer electronics. > > A low power version could use electronic paper and MRAM > logic. > > > And yes, it will be a modified Linux system. > > All is good, then. Zero proprietary components. > > -- I've got Puppy Linux running on an old P90 MHz laptop with only 73MB of memory and it's wonderful! Made an old machine useable again. It runs off a 60MB bootable cd that loads everything into RAM, but can also be easily installed on hard disk. BillK From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 10:39:13 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 02:39:13 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Article about talk by Leon Kass ("Brave New Biology") Message-ID: Another article, this time regarding a talk by Leon Kass, who was until recently head of the President's Council on Bioethics: *http://tinyurl.com/8cqrg *Needless to say, he isn't much a fan of transhumanism. "Brave New World" and derivations of it definitely seem to be the buzz-phrase of choice when people want to make transhumanist technologies sound a scary as possible. Some quotes: "The bottom of our troubles" is not the biotechnologies themselves, Kass said, but resides in the underlying thought of what he terms "Brave New Biology," his reference to the "charming but disturbing" 1932 dystopian novel "Brave New World." For Kass, that underlying thought has progressive aspirations that can give rise to dangerous consequences: enhancing natural physical talents through steroids, engineering perfect children, unnaturally extending the human lifespan. ... Biotechnology is no longer reserved for its traditional goals of healing illness and relieving suffering, Kass said. "Human nature itself lies on the operating table, ready for alteration . . . for wholesale redesign," he said, citing birth control pills, surrogate wombs, brain implants, and the promotion of "Ritalin for the young, Viagra for the old, Prozac for everyone." With today's biotechnologies, "we can take ourselves to a 'Brave New World' all by ourselves." "Many of us are worried," he said, denying that he fears the unknown or is ignorant of science. "We can see all too clearly where the train is headed and we do not like the destination." What is most troubling to Kass is "runaway" biotechnology's transformation of the meaning of humanity, a threat to human dignity that society is slow to recognize. The "Brave New Biology" has become a reductive science that treats a human as a natural resource - an organ, a fertilized egg - rather than as a soul with dignity, he said. Science explains how the human body works and how to make it work better, but does not address what a human should be. Science is a wonderful thing, Kass said. "But wisdom ain't what it's about." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 17 15:45:06 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:45:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003201c5eb8d$e935cb20$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > Is their [Wal-Mart's] business model efficient or not? The experiment to answer this question has been made under real world conditions and the results are in and they are unambiguous. Yes, we can now say with a certainty equal to anything in science that Wal-Mart is more efficient than any competitor they have met up to now. You claim to have ideas that are even more efficient than Wal-Mart, well that's marvelous; but don't just yak about it on the Extropian list, prove your ideas are correct by starting up a chain of Parkinson department stores (Park-Mart) and push Wal-Mart into bankruptcy and become the richest man in the world. > Really? Yes really. John K Clark From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 15:48:59 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:48:59 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in In-Reply-To: <002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511170748x1105ee38k459730ecd9766c53@mail.gmail.com> On 11/16/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > Is their business model efficient or not? I am saying here and now it is > not. ### Jack, acknowledg the simple fact - price is the measure of efficiency. Learn the basics of economy before you start arguing. Rafal From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 16:02:18 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:02:18 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/17/05, justin corwin wrote: > > I'm forwarding this news item from my boss to this list because it > seems he didn't post it here. > > It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that there > should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to join a > project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to do > this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an > extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. > Getting good people to do *anything* is an uphill struggle. In general, you either offer them large amounts of money and/or something interesting - usually both. Good people who are true 'self starters' end up millionaires very rapidly - they are truly rare. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 16:42:42 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:42:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511170842g356083a6h788a51cfac1cf75d@mail.gmail.com> On 11/16/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > > This is why everybody should oppose walmarts in their > towns - there is no reason why my tax money should be > spent subsidizing one of this country's most profitable > businesses. > ### No, it's like cutting off your leg to treat nail fungus. Treat the disease, subsidies, not remove the affected organ, that is retail trade. Want to stop subsidies ending up in my pocket (I am a Wal-mart shareholder, just like millions of other affluent Americans), kill subsidies, not me. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 16:47:45 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:47:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> On 11/16/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > Rafal Smigrodzki said: > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) > > > Jack Parkinson wrote" > >> If you want to convince me (and maybe a few others) - then this is the > >> challenge: Demonstrate (don't just sneer or give me another side-stepping > >> opinion piece) exactly HOW Wal Mart is more efficient for America than > >> several thousand smaller stores would be. > > > > ### When I suggested thinking about Wal-Mart as a big truck, it wasn't > > just empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart *is* a trucking company, with outlets. > > And this is why it is possible to concretize thinking about its > > efficiency: A large semi is more efficient than a dozen vans when it > > comes to the transport of a large amount of goods from e.g. Minnesota > > to Florida. This is so not because it has "bargaining power" over the > > vans, or can physically push them off the road, but because it can > > fulfill the needs (e.g. having Land of Lakes butter in Florida) of > > more people at a smaller overall cost in terms of human effort (fewer > > drivers, less drag, more durability, less gas per pound of freight) - > > and that amount of effort finds its true measure in the relative > > prices of Land of Lakes butter delivered by semi or van. > > > Once again you have delivered an opinion piece without a shred of evidence. > Using your logic I can be sure that elephants are more efficient than dogs, > and maybe a big SUV is more efficient than a small car... > But you did not answer the question at all. ### If neither plain language, nor price analysis, nor analogies are sufficient for you to understand the economist's meaning of "efficiency", I won't be able to help you. Gee, you are playing dumb - WTF do you mention SUV's, for god's sake! You don't understand the way a big truck is more efficient than a dozen vans? Really? Let me ask you an IQ question: Is the relationship of truck vs. van the same as the relationship of SUV vs. small car, in the context of freight delivery? Are you really incapable of understanding, or just playing? -------------------------------- > > I put it to you (several times) that Wal Mart is a less efficient producer > of national wealth - in overall financial terms -than the small business > alternatives I proposed. But, you apparently cannot argue this point other > than to give me one statement of belief after another. > > Maybe you are just wrong? > ### No, it's you who are ignorant of basic economics. In a competitive economy, price is the measure of efficiency, period. Just learn this simple fact. -------------------------------- > This quote via a private email from Mike Lorrey: "This company has, as a > corporate policy, an employee handbook that specifically teaches employees > how to apply for welfare, medicare, > section 8 housing, and other government entitlements, AS IF SUCH THINGS ARE > EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. Walmart is thus externalizing its labor costs onto the > taxpayer." > > Wal Mart is directly subsidised to the tune of perhaps US $1.5 billion - it > exploits welfare payments as a matter of course to compensate for it's poor > recompense of employees - and you call this 'efficient!' > Wal-Marts political links and political activities are well documented. If > obtaining this level of support is not being 'a government creature' then > what is? > ### Call your senator and congressman, if you have a problem with how they spend your money. Walmart is acting under the legal regime not of it's own making - a regime built by economical ignoramuses. If you give out money for nothing, expect somebody will pick it up. Rafal From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 17 17:01:12 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:01:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:47:45 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### No, it's you who are ignorant of basic economics. In a competitive > economy, price is the measure of efficiency, period. Just learn this > simple fact. Where do you get that idea, Rafal? I assume you are referring here to the retail price of Walmart goods. An inefficient company can sell goods below cost and by your standard look "efficient" even while it's filing for bankruptcy. From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 17 17:17:28 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:17:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > Using your logic I can be sure that elephants are more efficient than dogs No, but in today's environment you can be absolutely positively 100% certain that elephants are more efficient than mastodons. There was a fellow by the name of Darwin who figured out how that works. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 17 18:02:05 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:02:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> "Rik van Riel" > What I object to is that Wal-Mart is introducing socialism > through the back door, by underpaying its workers so badly > that they have to rely on government help to make ends meet. I object to that too, the solution is to stop the government help. Employers always try to get the cheapest employees they can and employees always try to get the best paying jobs they can, complaining about that fact of life is like complaining about gravity. The reason Wal-Mart employees (and the employees of their competitors) don't make a lot of money is that pool of people with their intelligence and skills is large and the number of jobs they would be competent in is not so large. In general if a worker is only worth 5$ an hour to his employer that employer he will never pay him more than that unless he is running a charity; and if there is a law that says he MUST pay 6$ an hour then he will simply hire nobody. John K Clark From mbb386 at main.nc.us Thu Nov 17 18:11:40 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:11:40 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] sony messing up computers In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511162110r49cf65bam@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051117024641.43680.qmail@web81609.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0511162110r49cf65bam@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48979.72.236.103.189.1132251100.squirrel@main.nc.us> > > But don't use their removal software, it creates a much worse security > problem on your machine. > http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20051116/tc_cmp/173603259 > > Isn't there a law against messing with DRM software: removing/disabling it is illegal? That would go for the anti-virus folks and M$oft as well as us customers. :) What a delightful nest of worms. Regards, MB From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 18:29:01 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:29:01 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.com> On 11/17/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:47:45 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > > ### No, it's you who are ignorant of basic economics. In a competitive > > economy, price is the measure of efficiency, period. Just learn this > > simple fact. > > Where do you get that idea, Rafal? ### Econ 101. ----------------------- I assume you are referring here to the > retail price of Walmart goods. > > An inefficient company can sell goods below cost and by your standard look > "efficient" even while it's filing for bankruptcy. > ### Well, you just illustrated my point - inefficient companies trying to sell cheap go bankrupt pronto, which means that when you look at the prices (and of course, profits) of surviving companies, you get a true measure of their efficiency. Of course, for brief periods of time you can send false pricing signals (e.g. on your first day of business sale) but Wal-mart has been around long enough to be sure its prices and profits are a proof of efficiency. Since at Wal-Mart prices are low and profits high, it means that it is a very efficient company. Rafal From fortean1 at mindspring.com Thu Nov 17 19:43:02 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:43:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Re: Bush says critics distort history Message-ID: <437CDD46.4090400@mindspring.com> [Forwarding comments from John Forester, son of C.S. Forester. -Terry] I have listened to excerpts of Bush's speeches, sometimes to whole speeches, and read excerpts, and the experience has led me to stronger recognition of the classic saying that patriotism is the final refuge of the scoundrel. Well, I have also read Imperial Hubris, and The Assassins' Gate, and I read two political magazines and a quarterly that frequently covers world events in detail; I suppose that what I have read in those has predisposed me to my judgement. But, on the whole, all the different items fit together in a consistent picture. In my opinion, were I in Bush's position (which I cannot, not having been born in the USA), I would accept responsibility for the decision to invade Iraq, for the errors that led to that decision, and to the errors in planning that have produced results far different from my expectation, and then do my utmost to work out a reasonable plan for fixing the problem that the nation, and the world, now faces. Bush refuses to take this course, insisting that we all accept that everything that he has done has been perfect and that all that we should do is to "stay the course", meaning to continue to carry out the plan (more nearly lack of plan) that has not worked in the expectation that it will work. I hark back to the account, some years ago, by one of his professors at Yale, stating that Bush always tried to escape responsibility for his errors and omissions. Same damned excuse, but now for the world-wide scale of problems Bush's attitude makes it very difficult for the Democrats to work out a better plan for recovery from this problem. As it is, they seem to be unable to get beyond a desire to get our troops out, as the contrast to Bush's insistence that the only patriotic act is to keep them in. In a parliamentary system, there might well have arisen a government of national unity devoted to working out the problem in the best possible way. This doesn't occur under the American Constitutional system. As long as Bush maintains control of the Republicans, that type of solution must wait until at least the next elections; it is possible that either Democrats take over, or that some Republicans opposed to Bush get elected. For an earlier attempt at solution we must hope for defection by a considerable portion of the Republicans. John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From fortean1 at mindspring.com Thu Nov 17 19:44:06 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:44:06 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) New entries for SKEPTIC Bibliography (creationism) Message-ID: <437CDD86.9050202@mindspring.com> http://www.csicop.org/bib/694 ????????????????????????????? The Evolution Hoax Exposed A. N. Field 1971, Tan; 104p. (Original: Why Colleges Breed Communists, 1941) creationism:defense, creationism:history An old (1941) creationist book that is interesting primarily because it gives a British rather than US-based anti-evolutionary view, and because it illustrates how little the "debate" between creationists and scientists have changed. Field gives a little of everything: selected scientific quotations against evolution, accusations of fraud, proofs that evolution is nothing but anti- Christian ideology, etc. etc. An interesting historical document. http://www.csicop.org/bib/695 ????????????????????????????? By Design: Science and the Search for God Larry Witham http://www.encounterbooks.com/books/byde/bydep.html 2003, Encounter; vii+248p. creationism:defense, religion:defense Witham, a journalist, argues that science and religion are coming closer together. This is happening, apprently, because scientists in many fields are finding suggestions of divine design in the universe: in cosmology, the complexity and evolution of life, explorations of the mind and brain, and attempts to explain human spiritual life. Witham focuses on two main ways religious scientists and theologians have been supporting intuitions of design. One is the softer, more liberal approach, which is characterized by institutions such as the Templeton Foundation that try and make room for religion in science by promoting spirit- friendly interpretations of science. The other is the harder-edged approach of intelligent design proponents, who demand a revolution in science by proposing to overturn Darwinian explanations. Witham's characterization of the current state of science is inaccurate at best; the intellectual currents he describes remain marginal to science. Nevertheless, bringing science and religion together in dialogue is an attractive enterprise now, finding much popular and wider cultural support. Witham's book is a valuable survey of the self- perception of religious scientists and theologians who believe they are making progress. http://www.csicop.org/bib/696 ????????????????????????????? The Wedge Of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism Phillip E. Johnson http://ivpress.gospelcom.net/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=2395 2000, InterVarsity; 192p. creationism:defense, religion:defense Another Phillip Johnson book on intelligent design and the evils of naturalism. It includes some clear and valuable discussions of the main preoccupations of intelligent design: the nature of mind and of information as much as biological evolution. Johnson places intelligent design in an explicity religious context, presenting it as a device to destroy naturalism and its pernicious influence in intellectual life. This, also, helps make sense of intelligent design by clarifying the broader concerns that drive the intelligent design movement. So, even if it is scientifically just about worthless, this is a valuable book that skeptics can learn a lot from. http://www.csicop.org/bib/697 ????????????????????????????? Darwin's Proof: The Triumph of Religion over Science Cornelius G. Hunter http://www.brazospress.com/ 2003, Brazos; 168p. creationism:defense, religion:defense An interesting book that falls in between the intelligent design and straight-creationist genres of anti-evolutionary literature. Hunter presents what he thinks are potent scientific arguments against evolution; many of these are variations on typical anti-evolutionary themes, though he emphasizes the complexity of molecular biology, in keeping with the more recent intelligent design style. More interesting are Hunter's excursions into philosophical and theological reasons to oppose evolution and support creation, including the parts where he accuses evolutionists of strongly relying on bad theological arguments to support evolution. Hunter may be partially correct: popular arguments for evolution do rely too much on intuitions of "bad design" in order to bring creationism into question. Still, that is hardly a fatal flaw in evolutionary science. http://www.csicop.org/bib/698 ????????????????????????????? Strange Creations: Aberrant Ideas of Human Origins from Ancient Astronauts to Aquatic Apes Donna Koss http://feralhouse.com/titles/kulchur/strange_creations.php 2001, Feral House; x+253p., illustrated crankery, creationism, creationism:history, newage, religion, UFO A fascinating book, covering strange views of human origins. Creationism and allied beliefs is one of its main themes, but Kossy also brings in ideas from the UFO subculture about alien interventions at the dawn of humanity, notions of human degeneration over time, racist theories of origins, eugenics, and the Urantia book. She even discusses the Elaine Morgan's "aquatic ape" theory as a scientifically weak but popular view. Kossy's approach is skeptical but lighthanded; the book is more an entertaining guided tour through various forms of weirdness than a quasi-academic analysis. Even seasoned skeptics will likely come across some new notions, and the less expert can get a good introduction of the subjects with useful pointers to more in-depth material. [ All reviewed by Taner Edis, bibliographer at csicop.org ] Visit the full bibliography at http://www.csicop.org/bibliography/ Please consider submitting an entry yourself. Taner Edis, SKEPTIC bibliographer -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 20:20:42 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:20:42 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Re: Bush says critics distort history In-Reply-To: <437CDD46.4090400@mindspring.com> References: <437CDD46.4090400@mindspring.com> Message-ID: On 11/17/05, Terry W. Colvin wrote: > > [Forwarding comments from John Forester, son of C.S. Forester. -Terry] > > > In my opinion, were I in Bush's position (which I cannot, not having > been born in the USA), I would accept responsibility for the decision > to invade Iraq, for the errors that led to that decision, and to the > errors in planning that have produced results far different from my > expectation, and then do my utmost to work out a reasonable plan for > fixing the problem that the nation, and the world, now faces. Bush > refuses to take this course, insisting that we all accept that > everything that he has done has been perfect and that all that we > should do is to "stay the course", meaning to continue to carry out > the plan (more nearly lack of plan) that has not worked in the > expectation that it will work. > > I hark back to the account, some years ago, by one of his professors > at Yale, stating that Bush always tried to escape responsibility for > his errors and omissions. Same damned excuse, but now for the > world-wide scale of problems > > Bush's attitude makes it very difficult for the Democrats to work out > a better plan for recovery from this problem. As it is, they seem to > be unable to get beyond a desire to get our troops out, as the > contrast to Bush's insistence that the only patriotic act is to keep > The obvious answer is to withdraw the troops and replace them with a pan-Arab UN force. Return the problem to its rightful owners. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From extropy at unreasonable.com Thu Nov 17 20:32:53 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 15:32:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.co m> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051117151834.074cbee8@unreasonable.com> Rafal wrote: >Since at Wal-Mart prices are low and profits high, it means that it is >a very efficient company. Their corporate management at work -- starting senior staff meetings at 7 AM, constantly measuring, experimenting, honing -- looks like they took lessons from how Andy Grove ran Intel. I suspect that part of what underlies Wal-Mart bashing is a lack of understanding of the functions of and necessity for middlemen. Time and again throughout history, the people and those in power have seen rich, successful middlemen (esp. the Jews and Chinese), resented their power and wealth, and saw them as fat ticks adding nothing of value. And every time they "cut out the middleman," the economy plummeted. Thomas Sowell has a good treatment of the subject, as usual. -- David. From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 17 20:55:07 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:55:07 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> On 11/17/05, John K Clark wrote: > Jack Parkinson > > > Using your logic I can be sure that elephants are more efficient than dogs > > No, but in today's environment you can be absolutely positively 100% certain > that elephants are more efficient than mastodons. There was a fellow by the > name of Darwin who figured out how that works. Interesting that misunderstanding of evolution accompanies misunderstanding of economics. Evolution does not say that today's organisms are necessarily more efficient than those that went extinct. I won't launch an (attempted) explanation at this time, since there's already enough going on. - Jef From sentience at pobox.com Thu Nov 17 21:10:54 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:10:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> Jef Allbright wrote: > > Evolution does not say that today's organisms are necessarily more > efficient than those that went extinct. > > I won't launch an (attempted) explanation at this time, since there's > already enough going on. I don't have enough time either, but "me too" to this point of evolutionary biology. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From joel.pitt at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 21:16:36 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Pitt) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:16:36 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437CF334.3080204@gmail.com> If I wasn't a year off from completing a PhD then I'd be applying for many such positions, even if it meant relocating to other side of the world from New Zealand. Hopefully you'll all still be looking for programmers in a year ;P Joel justin corwin wrote: > I'm forwarding this news item from my boss to this list because it > seems he didn't post it here. > > It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that there > should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to join a > project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to do > this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an > extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. > > Here's his original message, and a link to the current news item on our site: -- What a strange machine man is. You fill him with bread, wine, fish, and radishes, and out come sighs, laughter and dreams. - Nikos Kazantzakis From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 17 21:42:35 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:42:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:29:01 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On 11/17/05, gts wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:47:45 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki >> wrote: >> >> > ### No, it's you who are ignorant of basic economics. In a competitive >> > economy, price is the measure of efficiency, period. Just learn this >> > simple fact. >> >> Where do you get that idea, Rafal? > > ### Econ 101. I think I understand your confusion, Rafal. You're confusing your micro and macro economics. In an efficient free market, prices for a good or service will be lower than otherwise, but this does not mean companies that sell at lower prices are necessarily more efficient. -gts From nvitamore at austin.rr.com Fri Nov 18 00:22:36 2005 From: nvitamore at austin.rr.com (nvitamore at austin.rr.com) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:22:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ExI: Best Practices - Virtual Organizations Message-ID: <380-220051151802236839@M2W047.mail2web.com> Does anyone have experience and knowledge about developing best practices for virtual organizations? If so, do you have any free time to work collaborate with me? Natasha Natasha Vita-More "I keep six honest serving-[people] (They taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When And How and Where and Who." - Rudyard Kipling -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 00:27:40 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:27:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing Message-ID: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20051114/organprinter_tec.html "Nurse, fax this heart to St. John's." ...okay, not quite, but it's an interesting take on 3D printing nonetheless. In theory, if one could coax a person's stem cells into the appropriate types of cells (which hopefully is mostly a matter of finding the right series of chemical, electrical, and possibly thermal cues), this device could then be used to pattern them into organs for reimplantation. An extreme end would be to print an entire new body for someone (say, a cryo patient) - although the brain would have to be transplanted and hooked up (and for cryo patients, working stem cells would have to be thawed out and restarted, then likewise for the brain after transplant), so this wouldn't help with problems inside the brain. (Of course, there's the possibility of emulating the brain in silico, then hooking that up to a reprinted body every several decades.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 02:09:10 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051118020910.58129.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Dirk Bruere wrote: > On 11/17/05, justin corwin wrote: > > I'm forwarding this news item from my boss to this list because it > > seems he didn't post it here. > > > > It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that > there > > should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to > join a > > project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to > do > > this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an > > extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. > > Getting good people to do *anything* is an uphill struggle. > In general, you either offer them large amounts of money and/or > something > interesting - usually both. > Good people who are true 'self starters' end up millionaires very > rapidly - > they are truly rare. One might argue that this is "something interesting". But you're right, to get the top talent you need to pair that with large amounts of money. IIRC, A2I2 isn't exactly offering $100K salaries - which is about the level I'd suspect they'd need to offer to actually get top-flight talent, and that's factoring in a discount for having something this interesting. From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 02:15:30 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:15:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] ExI: Best Practices - Virtual Organizations In-Reply-To: <380-220051151802236839@M2W047.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20051118021531.59580.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "nvitamore at austin.rr.com" wrote: > Does anyone have experience and knowledge about developing best > practices > for virtual organizations? If so, do you have any free time to work > collaborate with me? Yes (if you mean what I think you mean by "best practices") and maybe (depending on the project and its needs). From joel.pitt at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 02:18:08 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:18:08 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: <20051118020910.58129.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051118020910.58129.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > One might argue that this is "something interesting". But you're > right, to get the top talent you need to pair that with large amounts > of money. IIRC, A2I2 isn't exactly offering $100K salaries - which is > about the level I'd suspect they'd need to offer to actually get > top-flight talent, and that's factoring in a discount for having > something this interesting. If you read the job descriptions on the website you would see that they are actually offering salaries in that range. Joel From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 02:23:53 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 02:23:53 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: References: <20051118020910.58129.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: > > On 11/18/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > One might argue that this is "something interesting". But you're > > right, to get the top talent you need to pair that with large amounts > > of money. IIRC, A2I2 isn't exactly offering $100K salaries - which is > > about the level I'd suspect they'd need to offer to actually get > > top-flight talent, and that's factoring in a discount for having > > something this interesting. > > If you read the job descriptions on the website you would see that > they are actually offering salaries in that range. > > Maybe I should apply:-) However, right now I'm involved with a VR startup Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 02:24:43 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:24:43 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> Adrian Tymes wrote: > .. In theory, if one could coax a person's stem cells into > the appropriate types of cells (which hopefully is mostly a matter of > finding the right series of chemical, electrical, and possibly thermal > cues), this device could then be used to pattern them into organs for > reimplantation. Perhaps you could elaborate on how this device could do that using an *actual* organ, any biological organ of interest to humans would do fine. > An extreme end would be to print an entire new body > for someone (say, a cryo patient) - although the brain would have > to be transplanted and hooked up (and for cryo patients, working > stem cells would have to be thawed out and restarted, then likewise > for the brain after transplant), so this wouldn't help with problems > inside the brain. (Of course, there's the possibility of emulating the > brain in silico, then hooking that up to a reprinted body every several > decades.) The "possibility" or the wild-eyed dreams are free and words are cheap speculation? Can you put a probability however small (0.1% as opposed to 10% etc in the next X years) on this and explain your reasoning, or is this pure flight of fancy and speculation quite without anything to do with reasoning at all on your part? You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with a good question besides wet yourself. Brett Paatsch From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 02:26:45 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 02:26:45 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject > header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides > you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with > a good question besides wet yourself. > > I think 'organ regeneration' sounds far more feasible and nearterm. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 02:33:45 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:33:45 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com><02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <02e001c5ebe8$7f872330$8998e03c@homepc> Dirk wrote: On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: Adrian Tymes wrote: You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with a good question besides wet yourself. I think 'organ regeneration' sounds far more feasible and nearterm. Dirk Why do you? Else who cares what sounds more feasible and near term to you? Are you analysing by reference to some relevant knowledge base that you can demonstrate or just guessing? Brett Paatsch -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 02:50:32 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 02:50:32 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <02e001c5ebe8$7f872330$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> <02e001c5ebe8$7f872330$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Dirk wrote: > > On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > > > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > > > You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject > > header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides > > you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with > > a good question besides wet yourself. > > > > > I think 'organ regeneration' sounds far more feasible and nearterm. > > Dirk > > Why do you? > > Else who cares what sounds more feasible and near term to you? > > Are you analysing by reference to some relevant knowledge base > > that you can demonstrate or just guessing? > There's a vast amount of work being done on organ regeneration. Just do a google search Or if you want 'in your face' progress try http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1754008,00.html "The experimental animal is unique among mammals in its ability to regrow its heart, toes, joints and tail. SCIENTISTS have created a "miracle mouse" that can regenerate amputated limbs or badly damaged organs, making it able to recover from injuries that would kill or permanently disable normal animals. The researchers have also found that when cells from the test mouse are injected into ordinary mice, they too acquire the ability to regenerate." Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 03:01:28 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 14:01:28 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com><02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc><02e001c5ebe8$7f872330$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <02fd01c5ebec$5f0aa6f0$8998e03c@homepc> Not bad Dirk. Thanks. A science paper would have been more impressive but you might not have access and your source, a "science editor" and story gives me some "in my face facts" to work with if I want to track them down. And I do now. I've got some reading time again. I can't be an expert on everything thats happening in real time so I like to know who knows and who just passes on rubbish that they hear without processing it. Brett Paatsch ----- Original Message ----- From: Dirk Bruere To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 1:50 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Organ printing On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: Dirk wrote: On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: Adrian Tymes wrote: You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with a good question besides wet yourself. I think 'organ regeneration' sounds far more feasible and nearterm. Dirk Why do you? Else who cares what sounds more feasible and near term to you? Are you analysing by reference to some relevant knowledge base that you can demonstrate or just guessing? There's a vast amount of work being done on organ regeneration. Just do a google search Or if you want 'in your face' progress try http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1754008,00.html "The experimental animal is unique among mammals in its ability to regrow its heart, toes, joints and tail. SCIENTISTS have created a "miracle mouse" that can regenerate amputated limbs or badly damaged organs, making it able to recover from injuries that would kill or permanently disable normal animals. The researchers have also found that when cells from the test mouse are injected into ordinary mice, they too acquire the ability to regenerate." Dirk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 03:09:10 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051118030910.77052.qmail@web81610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > .. In theory, if one could coax a person's stem cells into > > the appropriate types of cells (which hopefully is mostly a matter > of > > finding the right series of chemical, electrical, and possibly > thermal > > cues), this device could then be used to pattern them into organs > for > > reimplantation. > > Perhaps you could elaborate on how this device could do that using > an *actual* organ, any biological organ of interest to humans would > do fine. I could, but others have done so quite eloquently. Google on "kidney scaffold" to find some of the writeups. That's about what I was thinking of: same technique, finer control. > > An extreme end would be to print an entire new body > > for someone (say, a cryo patient) - although the brain would have > > to be transplanted and hooked up (and for cryo patients, working > > stem cells would have to be thawed out and restarted, then likewise > > for the brain after transplant), so this wouldn't help with > problems > > inside the brain. (Of course, there's the possibility of emulating > the > > brain in silico, then hooking that up to a reprinted body every > several > > decades.) > > The "possibility" or the wild-eyed dreams are free and words are > cheap speculation? Can you put a probability however small (0.1% > as opposed to 10% etc in the next X years) on this and explain > your reasoning, or is this pure flight of fancy and speculation quite > without anything to do with reasoning at all on your part? The possibility, and neither. It's far enough in the future that to put a probability on it now would be meaningless - this is most certainly not something that's right around the corner - but on the other hand, such a thing is consistent with our current understanding of how neurons work, and there has been significant work done on it. Google on "brain prosthetic" to see some of those examples. (Very early stage - we're talking artificial retinas, robotics controlled directly from the brain, and so forth, as well as mapping of the brain's functions by region.) > You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject > header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides > you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with > a good question besides wet yourself. I don't think you're picking on me, although I do think you could have phrased those questions a lot less offensively. I also think it would have been better all around if you had tried a few search queries yourself before assuming I was dreaming. There's a reason they call it http://stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 03:09:51 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 03:09:51 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <02fd01c5ebec$5f0aa6f0$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051118002740.88813.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <02bd01c5ebe7$3cdee320$8998e03c@homepc> <02e001c5ebe8$7f872330$8998e03c@homepc> <02fd01c5ebec$5f0aa6f0$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Not bad Dirk. > Thanks. > A science paper would have been more impressive but you might not have > access and your source, a "science editor" and story gives me some "in my > face facts" to work with if I want to track them down. And I do now. I've > got some reading time again. > I can't be an expert on everything thats happening in real time so I like > to know who knows and who just passes on rubbish that they hear without > processing it. > Here's the people doing the research http://www.wistar.upenn.edu/research_facilities/heberkatz/research.htm Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 03:13:15 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:13:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051118031315.48279.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: > On 11/18/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > One might argue that this is "something interesting". But you're > > right, to get the top talent you need to pair that with large > amounts > > of money. IIRC, A2I2 isn't exactly offering $100K salaries - which > is > > about the level I'd suspect they'd need to offer to actually get > > top-flight talent, and that's factoring in a discount for having > > something this interesting. > > If you read the job descriptions on the website you would see that > they are actually offering salaries in that range. So they are. I missed that page when I checked that site. (This is also why I said "IIRC" - because as it turned out, I didn't RC. ;) ) From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 18 03:18:06 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:18:06 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170748x1105ee38k459730ecd9766c53@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002001c5ebee$b6130210$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" said: To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 11:48 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in On 11/16/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > Is their business model efficient or not? I am saying here and now it is > not. ### Jack, acknowledg the simple fact - price is the measure of efficiency. Learn the basics of economy before you start arguing. Rafal Price is only ONE measure of economic efficiency. And, even then it may be measured on widely variant scales. There are also definitions of efficiency which are not economic. You continue to make the assumption that what is good and profitable - and therefore efficient - for big business is also good, profitable and efficient for the whole country. THIS is assumption I am challenging and the idea I have repeatedly asked you to address - you have not done so. Your parroting of platitudes like 'price is the measure of efficiency' only reinforces my conviction that you you cannot offer a shred of hard evidence to support what is actually NOT a reasoned point of view at all - It's just your own blind belief. Jack Parkinson From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 03:31:01 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 14:31:01 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118030910.77052.qmail@web81610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <031c01c5ebf0$7fc459a0$8998e03c@homepc> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: >> Adrian Tymes wrote: >> > .. In theory, if one could coax a person's stem cells into >> > the appropriate types of cells (which hopefully is mostly a matter >> of >> > finding the right series of chemical, electrical, and possibly >> thermal >> > cues), this device could then be used to pattern them into organs >> for >> > reimplantation. >> >> Perhaps you could elaborate on how this device could do that using >> an *actual* organ, any biological organ of interest to humans would >> do fine. > > I could, but others have done so quite eloquently. Google on "kidney > scaffold" to find some of the writeups. That's about what I was > thinking of: same technique, finer control. > >> > An extreme end would be to print an entire new body >> > for someone (say, a cryo patient) - although the brain would have >> > to be transplanted and hooked up (and for cryo patients, working >> > stem cells would have to be thawed out and restarted, then likewise >> > for the brain after transplant), so this wouldn't help with >> problems >> > inside the brain. (Of course, there's the possibility of emulating >> the >> > brain in silico, then hooking that up to a reprinted body every >> several >> > decades.) >> >> The "possibility" or the wild-eyed dreams are free and words are >> cheap speculation? Can you put a probability however small (0.1% >> as opposed to 10% etc in the next X years) on this and explain >> your reasoning, or is this pure flight of fancy and speculation quite >> without anything to do with reasoning at all on your part? > > The possibility, and neither. Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. > It's far enough in the future that to > put a probability on it now would be meaningless - this is most > certainly not something that's right around the corner - but on the > other hand, such a thing is consistent with our current understanding > of how neurons work, and there has been significant work done on it. > Google on "brain prosthetic" to see some of those examples. (Very > early stage - we're talking artificial retinas, robotics controlled > directly from the brain, and so forth, as well as mapping of the > brain's functions by region.) > >> You might think I'm pick on you. Well you composed the subject >> header "Organ Printing", you advertised and I came to see, besides >> you are pretty smart, you just might be able to do something with >> a good question besides wet yourself. > > I don't think you're picking on me, although I do think you could have > phrased those questions a lot less offensively. I also think it would > have been better all around if you had tried a few search queries > yourself before assuming I was dreaming. If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting it to Adrian. I am interested in what you know not in whether you can Google. I know I can. Telling someone to Google avoids having to demonstrate knowing anything (it also allows ignorance to remain hidden). > There's a reason they call it > http://stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ Yeah, marketing Google as a brand is most likely the reason. It makes every adolescent smart arse able to appear to be an expert on everything (which appeals to adolescent smart arses) so long as its not important enough for the other to take the time to publicly tear them a new one for faking expertise. Being able to Google no more makes a person knowledgeable (in a world of bullshitters) than being able to speak makes them make sense. Brett Paatsch From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 18 03:56:08 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:56:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in In-Reply-To: <002001c5ebee$b6130210$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170748x1105ee38k459730ecd9766c53@mail.gmail.com> <002001c5ebee$b6130210$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: > On 11/16/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > >> Is their business model efficient or not? I am saying here and now it is >> not. > ### Jack, acknowledg the simple fact - price is the measure of > efficiency. Learn the basics of economy before you start arguing. > Rafal > > Price is only ONE measure of economic efficiency. Sorry to keep butting in here, but WalMart's low prices are not a measure the company's efficiency. Because of economies of scale, WalMart has low *costs*, and those low costs are passed along to the consumer as low prices. Walmart could lower prices even further. Would those lower prices make the company even more efficient? Probably not. From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 04:08:23 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:08:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <031c01c5ebf0$7fc459a0$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051118040824.85615.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. ...? This looks like an attempt to troll, rather than a sincere attempt to acquire information. (What were the reasons I gave for not wanting to give predictions in general in cases like this, if not reasoning?) > If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian > have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting it > to Adrian. As does this. (The topic at hand is organ printing - including whether or not it may be feasable, and possible superior alternatives like organ regeneration - not what I personally know. Truth and reality tend to remain the same regardless of whether any given person is or is not dreaming. If you mean to say that organ printing is unfeasable, then please provide evidence of that.) Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. Flaming and personal attacks are, of course, not tolerated per list policy - but being the subject, I doubt I should be the one to determine for certain if they are (even if I were an admin). From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 18 04:19:29 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:19:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <20051118040824.85615.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511180419.jAI4Jhe08746@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes ... > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. > > ...? This looks like an attempt to troll... > > > If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian > > have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting > > it to Adrian. > > As does this... > > Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. > Flaming and personal attacks are, of course, not tolerated per list > policy - but being the subject, I doubt I should be the one to > determine for certain if they are (even if I were an admin). ... While not particularly diplomatic, it is still short of flaming and direct personal attack. Guys, do be good to each other, we are all in this together. Brett no one here is presenting themselves as an expert in organ printing. Cool idea, hope they can work it out. We need another extro-schmooze. Adrian, Brett, I expect you guys would like each other in the flesh. Last time at extro5 I was amazed at how well some of the classic disagreers got along. spike From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 04:27:47 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 04:27:47 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <200511180419.jAI4Jhe08746@tick.javien.com> References: <20051118040824.85615.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200511180419.jAI4Jhe08746@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, spike wrote: > > > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes > ... > > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > > Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. > > > > ...? This looks like an attempt to troll... > > > > > If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian > > > have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting > > > it to Adrian. > > > > As does this... > > > > Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. > > Flaming and personal attacks are, of course, not tolerated per list > > policy - but being the subject, I doubt I should be the one to > > determine for certain if they are (even if I were an admin). > ... > > While not particularly diplomatic, it is still short > of flaming and direct personal attack. Guys, do be > good to each other, we are all in this together. Brett > no one here is presenting themselves as an expert in > organ printing. Cool idea, hope they can work it out. > > We need another extro-schmooze. Adrian, Brett, I expect > you guys would like each other in the flesh. Last time > at extro5 I was amazed at how well some of the classic > disagreers got along. > > Well, google is your friend. Enter "organ printing" and the first thing that comes up is http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/07/2115235&from=rss "*"Organ printing is an emerging branch of medicine which uses healthy cells to repair a damaged or diseased organ. But as its name implies, this new medical technology needs ink, paper and a printer. Now, a new hydrogel-- or biopaper -- developed at the University of Utah has been selected by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to speed up this process. This five-year NSF study will initially try to print blood vessels and cardiovascular networks. But its real goal is to build some complex organs, such as livers or kidneys. This technology can potentially help millions of people waiting for transplants."" Dirk * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 18 04:30:39 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:30:39 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: Rafal Smigrodzki said: >> http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf > > ### I don't read propaganda from the Socialist Republic of Berkeley I guess this statement says it all. Reasonable people form their viewpoints after an intelligent appraisal of the pros and cons of the debate. You don't - and I think John C is of similar mind. I have been aware for some time that yours and John's viewpoints are highly emotive in tone. You both present opinions that appear to be shaped by ideology in defiance of reason, and you both rely on ridicule and diversion where well-crafted debate is the accepted - and the expected - mode of communication. Oh well - your loss! I think all the points regarding Wal Mart have been well and truly made now anyway. I just want to say this: People who are prepared to self-censor - to make sure that their precious beliefs remain unchallenged by reason and logic - accomplish this by isolating themselves deliberately from opposing viewpoints. These people must appear as a gift from heaven to the unscrupulous business people and politicians who use and manipulate them so easily. Quite probably, they are a large part of the reason there is now such an incestuous relationship between big corporations and government this kind of debate becomes possible. A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along the road to fossilization. If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves you well. Good luck! Jack Parkinson From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 18 04:39:05 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:39:05 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] sea-based intercept In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511180439.jAI4dIe10433@tick.javien.com> We hit it, woooohoooo! {8-] http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/18/content_3797184.htm Odd that the Chinese were the first to report it, can't find anything anywhere else. spike From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 04:40:34 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:40:34 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <200511180419.jAI4Jhe08746@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <037101c5ebfa$370a7230$8998e03c@homepc> Spike wrote: > >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes > ... >> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: >> > Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. >> >> ...? This looks like an attempt to troll... >> >> > If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian >> > have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting >> > it to Adrian. >> >> As does this... >> >> Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. >> Flaming and personal attacks are, of course, not tolerated per list >> policy - but being the subject, I doubt I should be the one to >> determine for certain if they are (even if I were an admin). > ... > > While not particularly diplomatic, it is still short > of flaming and direct personal attack. Guys, do be > good to each other, we are all in this together. Brett > no one here is presenting themselves as an expert in > organ printing. Cool idea, hope they can work it out. > > We need another extro-schmooze. Adrian, Brett, I expect > you guys would like each other in the flesh. Last time > at extro5 I was amazed at how well some of the classic > disagreers got along. I like him well enough in the non flesh. I also figure him to be one of the brighter generalists on the list for what thats worth. When he uses IIRC as "if I recall correctly" when it should stand for "If I'd Read Content" that I get irked. One can't recall what one hadn't read. Intelligent people can be amongst the *most* gullible. Adrian seems to me to be in both camps. Brett Paatsch From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 18 05:05:31 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:05:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Re: Bush says critics distort history References: <437CDD46.4090400@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <002b01c5ebfd$b37eebe0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: Dirk Bruere >> On 11/17/05, Terry W. Colvin wrote: [Forwarding comments from John Forester, son of C.S. Forester. -Terry] Bush's attitude makes it very difficult for the Democrats to work out a better plan for recovery from this problem. As it is, they seem to be unable to get beyond a desire to get our troops out, as the contrast to Bush's insistence that the only patriotic act is to keep > The obvious answer is to withdraw the troops and replace them with a pan-Arab UN force. Return the problem to its rightful owners. Seems reasonable to me. I am no military expert, but I may be on par, militarily speaking, with some of the people towards the bottom of this list (and wouldn't Bush like to distort THIS historic list): military records Democrats: * Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71. * David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72. * Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72. * Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade. * Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam. * Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII. * John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts. * Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea. * Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam. Paraplegic from war injuries. Served in Congress. * Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53. * Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74. * Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91. * Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons. * Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars,and Soldier's Medal. * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit. * Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart. * Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat * Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star. * Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57 * Chuck Robb: Vietnam * Howell Heflin: Silver Star * George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII. * Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311. * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy. * Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953 * John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18 Clusters. * Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg. AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT: Republicans -- and these are the guys sending people to war: * Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage. * Dennis Hastert: did not serve. * Tom Delay: did not serve. * Roy Blunt: did not serve. * Bill Frist: did not serve. * Mitch McConnell: did not serve. * Rick Santorum: did not serve. * Trent Lott: did not serve. * John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business. * Jeb Bush: did not serve. * Karl Rove: did not serve. * Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism. * Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve. * Vin Weber: did not serve. * Richard Perle: did not serve. * Douglas Feith: did not serve. * Eliot Abrams: did not serve. * Richard Shelby: did not serve. * Jon! Kyl: did not serve. * Tim Hutchison: did not serve. * Christopher Cox: did not serve. * Newt Gingrich: did not serve. * Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor. * George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for US. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty. * Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non- combat role making movies. * B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea. * Phil Gramm: did not serve. * John McCain: Vietnam POW, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. * Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve. * John M. McHugh: did not serve. * JC Watts: did not serve. * Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem, " although continued in NFL for 8 years as quarterback. * Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard. * Rudy Giuliani: did not serve. * George Pataki: did not serve. * Spencer Abraham: did not serve. * John Engler: did not serve. * Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer. * Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base. Pundits & Preachers * Sean Hannity: did not serve. * Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.') * Bill O'Reilly: did not serve. * Michael Savage: did not serve. * George Will: did not serve. * Chris Matthews: did not serve. * Paul Gigot: did not serve. * Bill Bennett: did not serve. * Pat Buchanan: did not serve. * John Wayne: did not serve. * Bill Kristol: did not serve. * Kenneth Starr: did not serve. * Antonin Scalia: did not serve. * Clarence Thomas: did not serve. * Ralph Reed: did not serve. * Michael Medved: did not serve. * Charlie Daniels: did not serve. * Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don't shoot back) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 05:14:36 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:14:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <037101c5ebfa$370a7230$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051118051437.74857.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > When he uses IIRC as "if I recall correctly" when it should > stand for "If I'd Read Content" that I get irked. Are you referring to the a2i2 bit earlier today? I read the linked-to page, and saw no mention of salaries there; I thought that perhaps the linked-to page was most of the information being given out in that context. (As it turned out, salaries were mentioned elsewhere on their site, but that required a bit more digging than I initially gave it. No one has infinite time to research every issue, though of course less-than-full-research should not justify much confidence in one's position.) I recalled an earlier discussion that had mentioned lower salaries, but of course memories are not always entirely correct. Thus the IIRC - which really was meant as "If I Recall Correctly", since I had read the content immediately at hand. (Again, it also flagged less than full confidence in the statement - a good thing, as said statement was then proven wrong.) From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 05:15:49 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:15:49 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118040824.85615.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <03bd01c5ebff$235a5e80$8998e03c@homepc> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: >> Then I know you can't know and aren't reasoning on the matter. > > ...? This looks like an attempt to troll, rather than a sincere > attempt to acquire information. (What were the reasons I gave for not > wanting to give predictions in general in cases like this, if not > reasoning?) Your 'reasons' were that "others" (unspecified) "had done so quite adequately". >> If my question is "Is Adrian dreaming" or alternatively "Does Adrian >> have a clue on this matter" then the test is best served by putting > it >> to Adrian. > > As does this. (The topic at hand is organ printing - including whether > or not it may be feasable, and possible superior alternatives like > organ regeneration - not what I personally know. Truth and reality > tend to remain the same regardless of whether any given person is or is > not dreaming. If you mean to say that organ printing is unfeasable, > then please provide evidence of that.) No. I meant to determine what you personally knew about the topic because you'd linked a news splash story that already strained my credibility by associating "printing" with biological organs (though it caught my interest as it was you that posted it and I'd heard Eugen talk of something similar) to your own notions on cryonics. > Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. And I'll accept any response. > Flaming and personal attacks are, of course, not tolerated per list > policy - but being the subject, I doubt I should be the one to > determine for certain if they are (even if I were an admin). I could have been more diplomatic. I probably should have been less undiplomatic but I get impatient sometimes. Brett Paatsch From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Nov 18 05:33:42 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:33:42 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing References: <20051118051437.74857.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <03f301c5ec01$a330bd50$8998e03c@homepc> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: >> When he uses IIRC as "if I recall correctly" when it should >> stand for "If I'd Read Content" that I get irked. > > Are you referring to the a2i2 bit earlier today? Yes, but in hindsight it was pretty much just a cheap shot by me (linking two unrelated matters). You didn't really deserve it. Brett Paatsch From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 05:41:04 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:41:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/16/05, justin corwin wrote: > > It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that there > should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to join a > project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to do > this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an > extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. Where have you previously advertised? I think this is the first I've heard about such offers. Also, while it's clear from your site that you have lofty goals, I have to confess that it's somewhat difficult to get an understanding of what steps you're taking to achieve those goals. Are there any intermediate products you're planning on pursuing, or is everything banked on being able to implement a Seed AI? Other questions which come up while perusing the site: Has the company published any research papers? Have any current employees published research papers relevant to AI? A final question left unanswered by the site: Why will you succeed in doing something that so many others have tried and failed to do? -- Neil -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 18 05:53:18 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:53:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net: [IP]Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] In-Reply-To: <200511150308.jAF38be05300@tick.javien.com> References: <200511150308.jAF38be05300@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Nov 14, 2005, at 7:08 PM, spike wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- >> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins >> >> >> On Nov 14, 2005, at 2:32 AM, BillK wrote: >> >>> >>> They also cite the company's treatment of its employees, whose >>> average >>> annual income is under $14,000... >>> >>> >> >> Hmm. I wonder why our ire is not also focused on a government that >> a) owns over 40% of the land; >> b) takes over 50% of the product of everyone's labor by force... I >> am far >> > more horrified and > >> utterly pissed at the government than at WalMart... >> >> - samantha >> > > > Some fiend has samantha locked in the back room and > is using her computer! Look for a ransom note. > I guess you don't know me that well. > Samantha, wow, this is spoken like a true > minarcho-capitalist. We are proud of you. > Sounds about right to me. > > Somewhere in this I should point out that > I had far worse jobs as a teenager than > Walmart. I woulda been pleased to work > there. Of course I would know that it > was only a springboard, as I knew some of > the jobs I had back then were. > Yep. The *very* low-level factory jobs were about the worse. - samantha From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 18 06:12:47 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:12:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <03bd01c5ebff$235a5e80$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051118061247.33641.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > I meant to determine what you personally knew about the topic > because you'd linked a news splash story that already strained my > credibility by associating "printing" with biological organs (though > it > caught my interest as it was you that posted it and I'd heard Eugen > talk of something similar) to your own notions on cryonics. Ah. I'll admit, that particular link was a bit of a flight of fancy. I'd hoped to note that by noting the other problems that would also need to be solved, even assuming everything worked perfectly (without the usual hiccups that plague endeavors like this), and that it was an "extreme end" of this technology - but even so, perhaps I did not stress enough how speculative that link was. (Often when I post speculation, one of the things I'm looking for is evidence that said speculation either might be or definitely is wrong.) It was not meant to represent that I had any great personal knowledge of the topic. Rather, it was mostly a "look at this neat thing these other guys have come up with" post. > > Admins: if he responds with flaming, I leave the response to you. > > And I'll accept any response. I think we've peaceably settled this now. :) > I could have been more diplomatic. I probably should have > been less undiplomatic but I get impatient sometimes. I hear you. I had to work on my own diplomacy on this one too. From femmechakra at hotmail.com Fri Nov 18 06:55:33 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 01:55:33 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Ok, again sorry to be bothering you I have a few questions when you have some available time I really don't want to be bothersome but what can I do, I really want feed back These are my questions, comments and curiosity? Don't rush, please take your time, I know your busy and I really don't want to annoy you Thanking you again Anna:) So let me get this right: Eliezer Yudkowsky created the Singularity Institute, which in, before or after wrote "Seed AI", "Levels of organization in General Intelligence", "Ethical Cognitive enhancement", "Creating Friendly AI" and "Shock Levels". -I'm sure his written more, but I'm asking if these are -his most popular works? -and yes.. i've read them all, many times -and yes.. I think they are brilliant The Foresight Institute is preparing for nanothechnology: -They are focused on their challenges such as -meeting Global energy with clean solutions (very recommendable) -Clean Water Globally (It's about time) -Increasing health and longevity of human life -Maximizing Productivity of Agriculture -Making powerful information Technology available everywhere -Understanding the development of space The Extropy Institute by Max Moore "A think tank "Ideas Market" for the future of social change brought about by consequential technologies"- Martin "An original philosophy from transhumanists" "As the extent of a living or organization system's intelligence, functional order, vitality energy, life experience and capacity and drive improvement and growth." Please read "Principles of Extropy" or "Precautionary principles" Transhumanism: by Julien Huxley 1957- the remaining human, but transcending oneself by realizing new possibilities of and for his or her human nature. by Dr. Anders Sandberg- describes modern transhumanism as "the philosopy that we can and should develop to higher levels, physically, mentally and socially using rational methods" by wiki- there exists an ethical imperative for humans to strive for progress and improvement of the human condition Should I have read (based on your opinion) Transhuman Principles? A little of Broderick, Smith and Einstein--we could have all the answers. no? Einstein's success: --Special Relativity --Brownian Methos --Photoelectric Effect --Equation E=MC2 Quote by Einstein "Quamtum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the old one. I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice" Quotes I didn't agree with regarding transhumanism: wiki: about transhumanism while Dr. Robin Hanson describes it as "the idea that new technologies are likely to change the world so much in the next century or two that our descendants will in many ways no longer be 'human'." wiki: about transhumanism A more notable critic of transhumanism is Bill Joy, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, who argued in his essay Why the future doesn't need us that human beings would likely guarantee their own extinction by transhumanist means. This led some to conclude that humanity has an inherent lack of competence to direct its own evolution. What I didn't agree about Yudkowsky: For those of you who went directly to Singularitarianism without stopping off at transhumanism along the way, and are wondering why the heck I'm going to such lengths not to say anything bad about selfishness, it's because a number of "transhumanist ethical philosophies are selfish in a foundational sense. This is a very formal sort of "selfishness" - for example, gaining selfish pleasure by gratifying your personal impulse towards charity is entirely acceptable (except to loony Objectivists). In my personal opinion this is part of the general overreaction of technocapitalist philosophies to the great Communist disaster, but that is, of course, only my opinion.)" I'm not clear about this? this is personal opinion about? -When I started researching I started at AI and broke -it down to transhumanisn. You can have selfish desires -and fufill them at the same time and give back to -humanity by making a positive impact on society? no? And by that time, some existing supergenius like myself will have long since built a Strong RSI that doesn't pass through the bottleneck of 200Hz neurons. -I'm not sure if this is him. I hope not, but I did file it under his name. (But i'm not sure) Please let me know -you may have "long since built a Strong RSI -that doesn't pass through the bottleneck -of 200Hz neurons." -but your ego will not let you become anything else -than what you've become: Self-centered+egotistical+ -smart=a very dangerous combination If you have something to say, don't phrase it in the form of a question. This holds especially true for your first post. Don't say: "I'm new here, but wouldn't X be Y?" Say: "I object, because I think that X will be Y", or just "X will be Y." --if someone comes to the site and has something to say: --a moderator should (not in all cases)1 acknowledge --that a person is trying to make contact. --If a person feels rejected or put down, chances are, --they won't be coming back.. --How does that promote the cause? A lot of people are smart and have a need to learn. It is unfortunate that popularity and difference combine together actually create something of a significance..but that's the way it is. a cause needs to be public..therefore you need to make in known to the vast population Does anybody have any idea how they are going to do this? Quoting Andrian Tymes: I have often found it a useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms (literally, in terms that an average child would understand). If you have a genuine question, please consider sending it to me rather than the list, especially if it looks like a question about the basics. If you have some question that looks blatantly obvious but isn't discussed anywhere - a "Well why didn't anyone think of this?" question - then please check with me first, because it almost certainly has been discussed already. You may also want to check the "Indexed FAQ" in "Creating Friendly AI". -This I won't comment on Based upon (not in all cases)1 This is a science-literate mailing list. If you're still unclear about whether humans evolved or were planted on Earth by flying saucers, you're welcome to read SL4, but you probably won't like what you read, and your first post will probably be your last. There could be an exception to this rule. We just haven't encountered it yet. -this can happen there are "kooks"..lol..out there, (and they must not be critized, just removed from the setting) but in general, for an ordinary, average human trying to grasp the theory seems almost impossible. How is it going to become worldwide or accepted if nobody knows to understand it? If you don't post an angry reply calling the moderator an evil dictator, it means you're a wimp. -This would be a naturel instinct based on criticism and lack of self-confidence However, this analysis is valid only if the pulsar exhibits no proper motion with respect to solar barycenter. Since this is likely never to be the case, a relativistic correction must be made to account for the Earth's constantly changing velocity with respect to the reference frame of the pulsar source. -I lost my notes on this and am curious if anybody can help me out. -When I quoted this, what was he talking about? >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the first > > time I > > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > >No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet the > > way I > > >communicate > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. > >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other people >to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to >others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > > > Anyhow > > >thank you for > > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes could > > you at > > >least look > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of it > > makes > > >sense, it would be much appreciated. > >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added more >comments. I shall respond to those. > > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > >computational leverage > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > > extent that > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience > >Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. > >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among those >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance the >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new >mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they are >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly and >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical terms, >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their body. > > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe > > (such > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > > physics > > >consistency arguments. > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and graphing, > > a human > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up with > > simple, > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > > >>huge knowledge and expertise. > >Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the path >to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more clearly. >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only works >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are trying >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. > >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. Yes, >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training and >experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it is >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of any >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen to >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained >individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, >as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too inaccurate >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at least >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want to >spend their limited time.) > >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of the >trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very well >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's specialty. >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 year >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said >child), for example. > > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > > sparse, high > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > > observer > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial > > frame > > >properties). > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > > framework). > >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. > >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn to >when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it often >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since many >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even though >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily >used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such as >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can be >found online. > >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic >description of the concept. > >And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do >have all the time in the world to give you information, or effectively >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on these >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ > >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this >alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and you >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's like >to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a lot, >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what it's >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). > >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar lines. >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got >other things I need to do tonight. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft? SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 18 07:06:31 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:06:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Organ printing In-Reply-To: <20051118061247.33641.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511180706.jAI76Te22084@tick.javien.com> ... > > > > And I'll accept any response. > > I think we've peaceably settled this now. :) > > > I could have been more diplomatic. I probably should have > > been less undiplomatic but I get impatient sometimes. > > I hear you. I had to work on my own diplomacy on this one too. Is it just my imagination, or has extropy-chat become a much more civilized place in the past year? {8-] Thanks guys. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 18 07:14:35 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:14:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for [dave@farber.net:[IP]Wal-Mart threatens employees: Don't see the Wal-Mart Movie] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511180714.jAI7EXe23269@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... > > > > Yep. The *very* low-level factory jobs were about the worse. > > - samantha We might get people talking about crummy jobs they had when they were younger. Mine was beekeeping. Doesn't sound that bad, white suits, etc. But it isn't that way. Most of the work needs to be done in the summer, and this was Florida, so it was 100F and 100%. The white suits are only that way for the first few minutes, after which the front is covered with smashed bees (their guts are yellow) then the dust sticks in that, so it is mostly black, then if one wants to keep the stings down to less than a dozen a day one must wear street clothes under the suit, and the effects of hoisting the 60 pound hives are still with me to this day, all for a grand total of 2.90 an hour. Walmart has air conditioning. spike From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 18 08:33:35 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 09:33:35 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for Message-ID: >We might get people talking about crummy jobs they had >when they were younger. Mine was beekeeping. Hmm. I babysat, then cleaned apartments and boats until I turned 16. From age 16 to 18 I flipped burgers at Carl's Jr. (I was a strict vegetarian then). I started college at age 17. From age 18 to 20, I worked in a scientific bookstore, first in town and then at my university. Those were also the years I was a teacher's assistant for the observational astronomy courses at Saddleback Community College. At age 20 I volunteered my time at Palomar Observatory to help a woman look for asteroids, and worked days during the week soldering capacitors at a fusion research lab at UC Irvine. At age 21 I started working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on the Voyager mission project. (five years to go from hamburgers to space missions) -- Amara Graps, PhD Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From pharos at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 11:02:09 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:02:09 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along > the road to fossilization. > If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for > you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves you > well. > The factor(s) that they seem to be missing is called (by real economists) Externalities. Look it up in economics texts. Don't get me wrong, competition is good, it brings down prices. In effect, one dollar, one vote. But this system has many weaknesses. If you define success in strictly material terms (e.g. business profit) and ask few questions about how it is achieved, you will find it leads to many of the horrors of modern civilization. Energy scams (Enron), cooked books (WorldCom), tax fraud, tax havens, dirty politics and the exploitation of child labor, slave labor and 'near-slave' labor. Another glaring example is the tobacco industry, who addicted and slowly killed many of their customers. (Still do, in third world countries). 'Internalize the Externalities!' should be our slogan, but it is hardly attention-grabbing. 'Make the Polluters Pay!' is much better. But this line of economic theory is much more complicated than the simple view of just looking at the net profit. It is more difficult to defend, like many complex theories. The scientists have long complex (and correct) arguments, the opponents have snappy one-liners and obvious-looking statements, so the Intelligent Designers win the popular support. BillK From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 18 12:04:39 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 20:04:39 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <005801c5ec38$45b487b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> ----- Original Message ----- From: "BillK" To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 7:02 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) On 11/18/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: >> A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along >> the road to fossilization. > >If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for > >you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves > >you > >well. > >The factor(s) that they seem to be missing is called (by real >economists) Externalities. Look it up in economics texts. >Don't get me wrong, competition is good, it brings down prices. In >effect, one dollar, one vote. But this system has many weaknesses. >If you define success in strictly material terms (e.g. business >profit) and ask few questions about how it is achieved, you will find >it leads to many of the horrors of modern civilization. Energy scams >(Enron), cooked books (WorldCom), tax fraud, tax havens, dirty >politics and the exploitation of child labor, slave labor and >'near-slave' labor. >Another glaring example is the tobacco industry, who addicted and >slowly killed many of their customers. (Still do, in third world >countries). >'Internalize the Externalities!' should be our slogan, but it is >hardly attention-grabbing. 'Make the Polluters Pay!' is much better. >But this line of economic theory is much more complicated than the >simple view of just looking at the net profit. It is more difficult to >defend, like many complex theories. The scientists have long complex >(and correct) arguments, the opponents have snappy one-liners and >obvious-looking statements, so the Intelligent Designers win the >popular support. BillK Amen. Excellent summary Bill, you have put succinctly into one post a good number of the points I was mulling over. The key point (for me at least) is that success cannot be defined in strictly material terms. And that is what I really wanted to get the Wal-Mart acolytes to consider. I hadn't got that far because they still think the 'economy' is the same as the 'people' and the 'people' are primarily a 'market'... and what is good for business is inevitably good for you me... Yeah right! I was even ready to settle for the 2nd best 'big picture' view that - EVEN when considered entirely in material terms - Wal Mart is not such a shining success when the expenses of supporting their shoddy treatment of staff and pandering to their political clout are factored in. But, the whole exercise of challenging someone's basic internalized perceptions of the world and its workings is a lot like wading through mud. This is not a rational argument, it's a clash of ideologies - and you can never really effectively argue intellect against emotion. If this WERE possible the fundamentalists would not be the plague that they are. Anyway, thanks for the summary, I could have done it myself but I was losing the will to live under the irrational onslaught. No doubt we will see a few more snappy one-liners and well-worn platitudes in rejoinder to these last posts on the matter. I have given up on any prospect of a well-presented argument from either John C or Rafal. Onward! Jack Parkinson From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 12:15:58 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:15:58 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/18/05, Amara Graps wrote: > > >We might get people talking about crummy jobs they had > >when they were younger. Mine was beekeeping. > > Hmm. I babysat, then cleaned apartments and boats until I turned 16. > From age 16 to 18 I flipped burgers at Carl's Jr. (I was a strict > vegetarian then). I started college at age 17. From age 18 to 20, I > worked in a scientific bookstore, first in town and then at my > university. Those were also the years I was a teacher's assistant for > the observational astronomy courses at Saddleback Community College. > At age 20 I volunteered my time at Palomar Observatory to help a woman > look for asteroids, and worked days during the week soldering capacitors > at a fusion research lab at UC Irvine. At age 21 I started working at the > Jet Propulsion Laboratory on the Voyager mission project. > > (five years to go from hamburgers to space missions) > Leather tannery Bakery tray shifter Supermarket shelf stacker (fired - no aptitude) Clerk Bottle watcher in brewery Chemist in brewery Soldier (part time - toy) all before I was 21 Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 18 12:58:48 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 04:58:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com> On Nov 17, 2005, at 8:30 PM, Jack Parkinson wrote: >> From: Rafal Smigrodzki said: >> > > >>> http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf >>> >> >> ### I don't read propaganda from the Socialist Republic of Berkeley >> > > I guess this statement says it all. Reasonable people form their > viewpoints after an intelligent appraisal of the pros and cons of > the debate. You don't - and I think John C is of similar mind. > > I have been aware for some time that yours and John's viewpoints > are highly emotive in tone. You both present opinions that appear > to be shaped by ideology in defiance of reason, and you both rely > on ridicule and diversion where well-crafted debate is the accepted > - and the expected - mode of communication. Oh well - your loss! I > think all the points regarding Wal Mart have been well and truly > made now anyway. > After watching this "debate" for some time I don't think you have a lot of high ground to preach from, Jack. > I just want to say this: People who are prepared to self-censor - > to make sure that their precious beliefs remain unchallenged by > reason and logic - accomplish this by isolating themselves > deliberately from opposing viewpoints. These people must appear as > a gift from heaven to the unscrupulous business people and > politicians who use and manipulate them so easily. Quite probably, > they are a large part of the reason there is now such an incestuous > relationship between big corporations and government this kind of > debate becomes possible. I really haven't see you being particularly open-minded or willing to question your own views. So why are you lecturing others? > > A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way > along the road to fossilization. > If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much > left for you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope > that it serves you well. > > Good luck! Good luck to you too. - samantha From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Fri Nov 18 13:22:01 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 21:22:01 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com> Message-ID: <006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: "Samantha Atkins" To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 8:58 PM > >>> From: Rafal Smigrodzki said: >>>> http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf >>> >>> ### I don't read propaganda from the Socialist Republic of Berkeley >> >> I guess this statement says it all. Reasonable people form their >> viewpoints after an intelligent appraisal of the pros and cons of the >> debate. You don't - and I think John C is of similar mind. > >> I have been aware for some time that yours and John's viewpoints are >> highly emotive in tone. You both present opinions that appear to be >> shaped by ideology in defiance of reason, and you both rely on ridicule >> and diversion where well-crafted debate is the accepted - and the >> expected - mode of communication. Oh well - your loss! I think all the >> points regarding Wal Mart have been well and truly made now anyway. >> > > After watching this "debate" for some time I don't think you have a lot > of high ground to preach from, Jack. - samantha Well, I'm listening. And I AM interested in hearing your point of view. And for the record, I was looking for the middle ground rather than the high ground... ...What exactly is your point of view? Jack Parkinson From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Fri Nov 18 14:16:30 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 09:16:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] sea-based intercept In-Reply-To: <200511180439.jAI4dIe10433@tick.javien.com> References: <200511180439.jAI4dIe10433@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <437DE23E.6000209@goldenfuture.net> Oh, I'm sure the Chinese are VERY interested in our ICBM-interception technology. It doesn't surprise me in the least they had it early. However, I did see it reported all over the US media yesterday; I know Drudge had it, and I'm seeing it on CNN's front page this morning. Joseph spike wrote: >We hit it, woooohoooo! {8-] > >http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/18/content_3797184.htm > >Odd that the Chinese were the first to report it, can't >find anything anywhere else. > >spike > > > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 14:49:06 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:19:06 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] a real pleasure to work for In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <710b78fc0511180649k5d628177n@mail.gmail.com> > On 11/18/05, Amara Graps wrote: > > >We might get people talking about crummy jobs they had > > >when they were younger. Mine was beekeeping. My most memorable bad job was working in Pizza Hut! Wow, when I first hit a double digit hourly pay rate as a supervisor, I thought I was going to be rich. Poor fool. But I did meet my wife of soon to be 10 years there, so it wasn't all terrible. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 28191 (http://nanowrimo.org) From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 18 17:06:17 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:06:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> Message-ID: <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" > Jef Allbright wrote: >> >> Evolution does not say that today's organisms are necessarily more >> efficient than those that went extinct. >> I won't launch an (attempted) explanation at this time, since there's >> already enough going on. > I don't have enough time either, but "me too" to this point of > evolutionary biology. Gee Eliezer it's a real pity you don't have time to elaborate further because you ideas would revolutionize biology. Unless that is you're just talking about genetic drift or the occasional unlucky accident of an asteroid landing on your head. These things are random and are as likely to benefit the underdog as the overdog, so despite this element of randomness the general direction of Evolution is clear and points in the direction of the winners. Like elephants over mastodons and Wal-Mart over mom and pop, at least in this environment. John K Clark From aiguy at comcast.net Fri Nov 18 17:25:39 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:25:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <012f01c5ec65$18e881f0$74550318@ZANDRA2> If the government raised the minimum wage gradually to above the poverty level, say $9.00/hr maybe, then companies like Walmart would not be able to take advantage of government subsidies because their employees would not qualify for them. Programs like public assistance should be reserved for people who can't work or find employment not people who are working full-time and still can't make enough to live on. While it is true that Walmart and companies like them may do a staff reduction in some areas, a companies like Walmart can not stay in business with out cashiers and people stock the shelves. If this was phased in over a three year period it would allow the economy and businesses the time to adjust. If the economy can weather a 33% hike in energy costs in less than a year we should be able to weather a gradual increase in mimimum wage. Of course costs will increase at Walmart also to compensate for their increased labor cost. Whether they can still be profitable without government subsidies is the true test of how efficient they really are. Of course this would effect far more stores than Walmart. Fast food would also be hit hard. And I understand it will cause inflation to some extent. But I think that's the price we all have to pay to live in a country where if people work hard the American dream is still within their reach. >> Employers always try to get the cheapest employees they can and employees always try to get the best paying jobs they can, complaining about that fact of life is like complaining about gravity. The reason Wal-Mart employees (and the employees of their competitors) don't make a lot of money is that pool of people with their intelligence and skills is large and the number of jobs they would be competent in is not so large. In general if a worker is only worth 5$ an hour to his employer that employer he will never pay him more than that unless he is running a charity; and if there is a law that says he MUST pay 6$ an hour then he will simply hire nobody. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 18 17:49:29 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:49:29 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com><002e01c5eb2b$2150ed40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><7641ddc60511170748x1105ee38k459730ecd9766c53@mail.gmail.com><002001c5ebee$b6130210$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <003901c5ec68$7536d990$e2064e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > There are also definitions of efficiency which are not economic. And are therefore subjective, and of course these subjective definitions and decisions will be made for all of us by a fellow by the name of Jack Parkinson. >You continue to make the assumption that what is good and profitable - and >therefore efficient - for big business is also good, profitable and >efficient for the whole country. THIS is assumption I am challenging People in slums have poor housing so just blow up the slums, problem solved. If someone has diarrhea just sew his rectum shut, problem solved. People in third world sweat shops don't make much money so just shut them down, problem solved. Mr. Parkinson I do not find your words "challenging" at all. You may think of yourself as a rebel, as a radical freethinker, but your very very conventional words can be found in any bar or high school cafeteria in America where an economic illiterate is spouting off about the evils of big business. I expect more from somebody on the very libertarian and economically sophisticated Extropian List. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 18 18:08:39 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:08:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <012f01c5ec65$18e881f0$74550318@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <004801c5ec6b$1f0dc8a0$e2064e0c@MyComputer> "Gary Miller" > If the government raised the minimum wage gradually to above the poverty > level, say $9.00/hr maybe, then companies like Walmart would not be able > to take advantage of government subsidies because their employees would > not qualify for them. That's true, it's also true that Wal-Mart would hire fewer people so there would be more people making ZERO dollars an hour and so would be getting even more government handouts. And consumers would have to pay more for things but despite this Wal-Mart would make less money. Sounds like pretty poor economic policy to me. > If the economy can weather a 33% hike in energy costs in less than a year > we should be able to weather a gradual increase in mimimum wage. They've increased the minimum wage before and we've survived and we'll likely survive if they do it again, but each time they do so they slow the economy, put more people out of work and increase poverty. John K Clark From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 18 18:16:06 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:16:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> John K Clark wrote: > "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" > >> Jef Allbright wrote: >> >>> Evolution does not say that today's organisms are necessarily more >>> efficient than those that went extinct. >>> I won't launch an (attempted) explanation at this time, since there's >>> already enough going on. > >> I don't have enough time either, but "me too" to this point of >> evolutionary biology. > > Gee Eliezer it's a real pity you don't have time to elaborate further > because you ideas would revolutionize biology. Already been done, by George C. Williams in "Adaptation and Natural Selection", 1966. This book is now regarded as a classic, and the 60s revolution in evolutionary biology is sometimes called the "Williams Revolution" for the role the book played in starting it. If allele A has an advantage over allele B in one environment, it does not follow that B cannot have an advantage over A given a different environment, a different ecology, or just a different species gene pool - other genes are also part of the selective environment. Your remark about elephants and mastodons did not even refer to alleles, but to species; and species selection is a discredited concept. Natural selection is about gene frequencies. Not individuals, not groups, and not species. For more I refer you to Williams's book, and no, I am not sending you to a fringe theorist; this is mainstream. The problem with evolution is that anyone who knows even a little about evolution tends to regard themselves as an expert, just because they're comparing themselves to the creationists. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From hartmut.prochaska at gmx.net Fri Nov 18 19:29:01 2005 From: hartmut.prochaska at gmx.net (Hartmut Prochaska) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 20:29:01 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [agi] a2i2 news update: still looking for additional talent In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ad827f30511162100h651f2576ge099f85409cf3a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437E2B7D.5020807@gmx.net> Hi, > It's frustrating, and definitely counter to my expectations that there > should be so much difficulty in finding good people who want to join a > project such as ours. Personally, the prospect of getting paid to do > this kind of work was a major goal of mine since I first became an > extropian, and began plotting my grand future plans. although your project sounds interessting, your problems reminds me of a presentation I recently heared on itconversations: http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail188.html cheers Hartmut -- "If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid." -Q, Star Trek:TNG episode 'Q Who' From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 18 21:12:41 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:12:41 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Vega Science Trust Message-ID: The Vega Science Trust http://www.vega.org.uk/ Five years ago Sir Harry Kroto spoke to our "Dust in the Solar System" symposium and mentioned his "Vega Science Trust".... Then I forgot about it. Today the cosmicvariance bloggers wax enthused about it. They say: ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/11/18/the-vega-science-trust/ Vega is dedicated to creating high quality science programming for broadcast on television and on the Internet. It was established in 1995 by Sir Harry Kroto, who won a share of the 1996 Nobel Prize in chemistry for the discovery of the Carbon-60 molecule. It shows a true dedication to public science communication that he started this project before winning the prize (although he had, of course, already done the relevant work at that point). The website contains large numbers of downloadable videos of outstanding scientists communicating their work. Ed commented to me that when he starts watching any of the four Feynman lectures, it is hard for him to stop. I feel the same way about many of the others. When I watch those on subjects far outside my research areas, I am reminded of the fun I used to have every year as a kid, watching the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures. You can watch the Lindau lectures, in which Nobel prize winners discuss their work in succinct, clear ways. You can watch talks about science and politics (Tony Benn, for example, for our British visitors). You can watch John Maynard Smith, the famous evolutionary biologist, who died last year on the 122nd anniversary of Darwin's death, talking about flight. And there are many more. If you're interested in how scientists come to choose this career, take a look at the snapshots series - 15 minute video clips in which scientists describe how they came into science. You'll discover that we come from surprisingly diverse backgrounds. The Vega site is delightful - a wonderful resource - and I'm extremely grateful to Ed for turning me on to it. ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin From extropy at unreasonable.com Fri Nov 18 21:07:43 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:07:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] In the new Physics Today Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051118160720.07cfff68@unreasonable.com> The new (Nov 2005) Physics Today is out. - Steve Weinberg (Nobel for charmed quarks) article on Einstein's mistakes - article on superconducting circuits and quantum information - Dan Kleppner essay (You may have seen the AP picture of Dan and his wife delivering bagels at 6 AM to new Laureate Roy Glauber a few weeks ago.) - letters to the editor about the Feynman lectures, including one from sf and science writer Jeff Hecht - an opinion piece from sf writer and physicist, Greg Benford (who teased my mother mercilessly about not getting paid for it) www.physicstoday.org or your local library. -- David. From bret at bonfireproductions.com Fri Nov 18 21:47:25 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:47:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sony Qrio, demos and new Beck music video Message-ID: Greetings Extropes, Beck released the music video for his song Hell Yes today, and musical tastes notwithstanding I think it is very much worth a view. The Qrio performs beautifully. I never thought I'd be one for robot dance numbers, but the work with balance and collision done here is really very good. They've got something going in the pevlis/knee/ ankle in a dual axis flavor of the segway by the looks of it - but I can't see offering constant resistance and keeping the juice low so I would have to guess actuated rare earth or something to keep cost down on the batteries. anyway. Qrio demo videos at Sony: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/QRIO/videoclip/index_nf.html Beck's video: http://beck.com/media/video.php?id=00019 ]3 From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 18 22:26:31 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:26:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Vega Science Trust (continued) Message-ID: The Vega Science Trust http://www.vega.org.uk/ Try this: Emma King: Cosmologist http://www.vega.org.uk/video/programme/89 This woman is amazing. Amara From brentn at freeshell.org Sat Nov 19 01:29:10 2005 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 20:29:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: (11/18/05 12:30) Jack Parkinson wrote: > >A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along >the road to fossilization. >If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for >you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves you >well. > >Good luck! > >Jack Parkinson Jack, What you said here needs to be said often (and loudly.) I just heard a speaker from CSIRO who discussed some of the characteristics of innovative environments. He said something much along these lines, covering everything from "aggressive civility" to "utter lack of sacred cows." Nowhere does the kind of ideological attitudes that are becoming prevalent in modern discourse enter into the path to progress. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sat Nov 19 02:00:16 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 21:00:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <437E8730.8070007@goldenfuture.net> Jack Parkinson wrote: > A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way > along the road to fossilization. > If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left > for you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it > serves you well. So... what did you think of tonight's "O'Reilly Factor"? Given your statements, I am sure you are an avid Fox New Channel viewer, if only to "listen and consider" to an opposing point of view, right? Joseph From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 19 02:54:19 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 10:54:19 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <437E8730.8070007@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <002101c5ecb4$8bbd8910$0201a8c0@JPAcer> From: "Joseph Bloch" wrote: To: "Jack Parkinson" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) > Jack Parkinson wrote: > >> A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along >> the road to fossilization. >> If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for >> you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves >> you well. > > > So... what did you think of tonight's "O'Reilly Factor"? > > Given your statements, I am sure you are an avid Fox New Channel viewer, > if only to "listen and consider" to an opposing point of view, right? > > Joseph I'll admit to being a bit of a news junkie... Unforunately my geographical location (currently Fujian Province, South-East China) precludes my watching O'Reilly. I see some BBC and CNN here otherwise my news comes via RSS or podcast from various news organisations around the world. Jack Parkinson From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 19 03:05:13 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 11:05:13 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30 References: <200511181900.jAIJ09e27020@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <002e01c5ecb6$12052fe0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > From: "John K Clark" > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: <003901c5ec68$7536d990$e2064e0c at MyComputer> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-15"; > reply-type=original > > Jack Parkinson > >> There are also definitions of efficiency which are not economic. > > And are therefore subjective, and of course these subjective definitions > and > decisions will be made for all of us by a fellow by the name of Jack > Parkinson. > >>You continue to make the assumption that what is good and profitable - >>and >>therefore efficient - for big business is also good, profitable and >>efficient for the whole country. THIS is assumption I am challenging > > People in slums have poor housing so just blow up the slums, problem > solved. > If someone has diarrhea just sew his rectum shut, problem solved. People > in > third world sweat shops don't make much money so just shut them down, > problem solved. > > Mr. Parkinson I do not find your words "challenging" at all. You may think > of yourself as a rebel, as a radical freethinker, but your very very > conventional words can be found in any bar or high school cafeteria in > America where an economic illiterate is spouting off about the evils of > big > business. I expect more from somebody on the very libertarian and > economically sophisticated Extropian List. > > John K Clark > > I think of myself as pretty ordinary, reasonable - and definitely moderate > John. I do also still think that your blind acceptance of the corporate > line is naive and gullible but so be it, I have made all the points I > wished to make on this matter (for now). We can agree to disagree! Pax :-) Jack Parkinson From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 19 04:42:21 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 20:42:21 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] ageing experiment In-Reply-To: <002101c5ecb4$8bbd8910$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511190442.jAJ4gPe08591@tick.javien.com> Hey cool, hope they are right on this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1645418,00.html spike From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 05:31:34 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 00:31:34 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> Message-ID: <001c01c5ecca$8dfffd00$7c064e0c@MyComputer> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" > If allele A has an advantage over allele B in one environment, it does > not follow that B cannot have an advantage over A given a different > environment, Maybe that's why I specifically said "at least in this environment" > a different ecology, or just a different species gene pool The same thing said 3 ways to sound cool. > Your remark about elephants and mastodons did not even refer to alleles I didn't talk about the lungs liver or spleen of elephants and mastodons either. I suppose I could have said something about alleles, it might have sounded erudite too, but it would have added nothing to the conversation. But if you insist: Although many, probably most, alleles have nothing to do with the resulting phenotype (junk DNA) the phenotype always has something to do with the fate of its alleles; an allele in a animal that dies before sexual maturity is going to find it rather difficult getting into the next generation; thus a allele always does better in a successful phenotype than a unsuccessful one. At the time I felt that pointing this out in a discussion about Wal-Mart would be full of sound and fury signifying nothing, a tail told by an idiot. I still feel that way. > and species selection is a discredited concept I like the theories of Williams and Dawkins, but to say species selection is a discredited concept is going too far, at least Stephen Jay Gould thought so. If I was a betting man I'd say there is a 65% chance that in 15 years it will be a discredited concept, but we're not there yet. John K Clark From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 19 05:49:23 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 21:49:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B5D7E24-5EDD-4B45-BA3B-B7EC1B4AEFE2@mac.com> On Nov 18, 2005, at 5:29 PM, Brent Neal wrote: > Jack, > > What you said here needs to be said often (and loudly.) > > I just heard a speaker from CSIRO who discussed some of the > characteristics of innovative environments. He said something much > along these lines, covering everything from "aggressive civility" > to "utter lack of sacred cows." Nowhere does the kind of > ideological attitudes that are becoming prevalent in modern > discourse enter into the path to progress. > One of the most productive teams I have ever been on was not at all inclined to civility. We did not attack one another but we merciless attacked one another's designs and opinions until we reached mutual agreements. Few new people were happy because it sounded to them like we were always arguing. But the three of us accomplished the miraculous. I have also seen it work with much more civility (and at lower volume) of course. But "ideological attitudes" or less civility are not a bar to progress per se. Perhaps you had in mind that form of incivility that starts attacking persons instead of the ideas they express. - samantha From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 06:10:18 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:10:18 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID Message-ID: I couldn't have said it better myself. Phony Theory, False Conflict: 'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 19 06:27:54 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 00:27:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:10 AM 11/19/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >I couldn't have said it better myself. > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html Well, you could have said it better if, instead of saying: "Newton's religion was traditional. He was a staunch believer in Christianity and a member of the Church of England." you'd said "Newton was a nonconforming Unitarian, who had to hide this fact." Isaac Newton: "In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books. "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none. If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best." Damien Broderick From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 06:36:41 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:36:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:27:54 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > Well, you could have said it better if... Yes, I suppose so, if my purpose had been to criticize the finer points of Newton's religion. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 06:57:39 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:57:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if my old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. I've been away from this discussion list for a couple of years. Is there a consensus here on this subject? -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 19 07:06:31 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:06:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119005838.01d49be8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:36 AM 11/19/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >>Well, you could have said it better if... > >Yes, I suppose so, if my purpose had been to criticize the finer points of >Newton's religion. Don't be silly (unless you think accuracy is entirely irrelevant). Krauthammer was offering the soothing bromide that religion has nothing to fear from science--why, look, here are these two great scientists who were also believers! But Newton was *not* a supporter of the conventional state religion of his day, as Krauthammer carelessly claims, and Einstein was so far from being a conventional believer that it's more truthful to say candidly that he was an agnostic at the edge of atheism. Confuting "intelligent design" of the fundamentalist Xian variety requires more than a comforting claim that hey, the three-in-one God in whom we can all believe built the cosmos with a magic all-in-one spell that left no room for belated hands-on interventions. Damien Broderick From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 19 07:06:49 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:06:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000501c5ecd7$d0772480$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "gts" > Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if my > old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. I've been > away from this discussion list for a couple of years. > Is there a consensus here on this subject? Opposed? What is there to be opposed about? After all, ID has no credibility. Monsieur IDiot is a poseur. Olga From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 19 07:15:26 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:15:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> -gts wrote: > Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if my > old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. I've been > away from this discussion list for a couple of years. Welcome back gts, we missed you, and of course we are against ID. I look at myself in the mirror, and say come on! Any "intelligent" designer with half a brain coulda done better than this. {8^D Actually I look at myself in the mirror and I am amazed, astounded. My mind boggles as I try to understand: why is it that the mirror reverses left to right but not top to bottom? I turn the mirror on its side, yet it still reverses left to right, even when I turn the mirror the rest of the way to upside down. How does that mirror know to do that? It never gets confused: I've never looked in the mirror to find my image upside down or non-reversed. spike From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 07:19:06 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 02:19:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> References: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 02:15:26 -0500, spike wrote: > Welcome back gts, we missed you, and of course we are > against ID. Thanks spike. I'm relieved. Maybe there is a God after all. :) From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 19 07:33:12 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:33:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000801c5ecdb$80329a00$56c31b97@administxl09yj> > Is there a consensus here on this subject? > > -gts ID seen from another palace of the Vatican City. http://www.comcast.net/news/science/index.jsp?cat=SCIENCE From amara at amara.com Sat Nov 19 07:55:11 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:55:11 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID Message-ID: >ID seen from another palace of the Vatican City. >http://www.comcast.net/news/science/index.jsp?cat=SCIENCE Nice. I do wonder if Ratzinger is aware of what his chief astronomer said, though. If any here have questions of the ID view from the Vatican Observatory (that _other_ piece of the Vatican City country located in the middle of Italy's Castel Gandolfo), I will be visiting there in about 10 days and I can ask. Within the teeth-gnashing of ID, here is a perspective that I think is good to keep in mind: The Kansas School Board is right http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/11/16/the-kansas-school-board-is-right/ Amara From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 19 08:56:16 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 09:56:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: Message-ID: <008201c5ece7$1acd4d70$28b01b97@administxl09yj> There is a good speech (or it seems so, at a very first look) by Hunter R.Rawlings III http://www.cornell.edu/president/announcement_2005_1021.cfm 'State of the (Cornell) University Address'. '[...] To that end, I ask our three task forces, on life in the age of the genome, wisdom in the age of digital information, and sustainability, to consider means of confronting the following questions: how to separate information from knowledge and knowledge from ideology; how to understand and address the ethical dilemmas and anxieties that scientific discovery has produced; and how to assess the influence of secular humanism on culture and society. [...]' s. From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 10:01:51 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:01:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <200511161900.jAGJ0Be09359@tick.javien.com> <001f01c5eb28$beb1a6e0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511170847ube47156y741d3ca9fc30aaf9@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511171029o405d966cr4dbdca656c099f44@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511190201je4410ccpa399a1d35e617bb1@mail.gmail.com> On 11/17/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:27:55 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > > Since at Wal-Mart prices are low and profits high, it means that it is > > a very efficient company. > > Profits are a measure of efficiency but not retail prices. Efficiency is > reflected in measures like earnings per share, profit margin, return on > equity, and ultimately measured best by looking at the stock price. ### Yes, I know about classical economic theory, and marginal analysis and the other measures of efficiency (production cost, profits, stock price), and I still say that retail prices are a good measure of the efficiency of both individual companies, and whole economies. Especially in retail, where profits are to a large extent dependent on sales volume, many companies aggressively act to increase sales volume, and to this end they keep prices low - of course, only highly efficient companies can lower prices without losing money. ---------------------------------------- On 11/17/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:29:01 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > > On 11/17/05, gts wrote: > >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:47:45 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki > >> wrote: > >> > >> > ### No, it's you who are ignorant of basic economics. In a competitive > >> > economy, price is the measure of efficiency, period. Just learn this > >> > simple fact. > >> > >> Where do you get that idea, Rafal? > > > > ### Econ 101. > > I think I understand your confusion, Rafal. You're confusing your micro > and macro economics. In an efficient free market, prices for a good or > service will be lower than otherwise, but this does not mean companies > that sell at lower prices are necessarily more efficient. ### For commoditized goods, over the long run, yes, companies with lower prices are more efficient. I know what is microeconomics, what is macroeconomics, and that all of macro comes from micro, thank you. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 10:20:44 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:20:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511190220u5345b49es77b9d46f878f9176@mail.gmail.com> On 11/17/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > From: Rafal Smigrodzki said: > > >> http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf > > > > ### I don't read propaganda from the Socialist Republic of Berkeley > > I guess this statement says it all. Reasonable people form their viewpoints > after an intelligent appraisal of the pros and cons of the debate. You > don't - and I think John C is of similar mind. > > I have been aware for some time that yours and John's viewpoints are highly > emotive in tone. You both present opinions that appear to be shaped by > ideology in defiance of reason, and you both rely on ridicule and diversion > where well-crafted debate is the accepted - and the expected - mode of > communication. Oh well - your loss! I think all the points regarding Wal > Mart have been well and truly made now anyway. > > I just want to say this: People who are prepared to self-censor - to make > sure that their precious beliefs remain unchallenged by reason and logic - > accomplish this by isolating themselves deliberately from opposing > viewpoints. These people must appear as a gift from heaven to the > unscrupulous business people and politicians who use and manipulate them so > easily. Quite probably, they are a large part of the reason there is now > such an incestuous relationship between big corporations and government this > kind of debate becomes possible. > > A mind that is resolutely closed to new ideas is already a good way along > the road to fossilization. > If you are not prepared to listen and consider, there's not much left for > you to do except to hang onto that belief system and hope that it serves you > well. > ### Jack, you are presenting, albeit in a simplified and watered-down manner, communist ideology with which I have been well-acquainted at school (a state-run, communist one) since before you were born. I don't have to listen, because I considered it and rejected it about 30 years ago. I wrote off the whole lot as a load of garbage and I don't intend to wade through it again. My belief system is what happens once a human rejects yours. I can only suggest you read some popular books on economics, starting with Hazlitt's, try "The Undercover Economist", or any other popular exposition of this science. This may really help you shed your preconceptions. Rafal From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 19 10:42:10 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:42:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com> <006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <4CDF6226-6492-4929-96B7-50DE38C8FE3A@mac.com> Message-ID: <001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer> ----- Original Message ----- From: Samantha Atkins To: Jack Parkinson Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:14 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) >>>After watching this "debate" for some time I don't think you have a lot >>>of high ground to preach >>>from, Jack. >>>- samantha >>Well, I'm listening. And I AM interested in hearing your point of view. >>And for the record, I was looking for the middle ground rather than the >>high ground... >>...What exactly is your point of view? >On WalMart my opinion is mixed. The company has done a magnificent job of >creating one of the >world's most sophisticated business organizations. >The level of innovation and integration of >countless systems, components, >business units and resources is not easily matched by any other >company. >The WalMart success is about a lot more than foreign and domestic >exploitation. On >the other hand, there have been a goodly number of >abuses successfully claimed against the >company. The superstores do tend >to drive out a lot of other businesses simply on the basis of >unbeatable >price. These businesses in turn employ people. Many of them cannot afford >to work >at a WalMart and have no desire to work in the WalMart >environment. >I don't believe that there is a definitive answer as to what "to do about" >WalMart. Real abuses of >existing law should be noted and prosecuted. >But I don't see any reasonable new forms of >legislation that it would be a >net win to impose on them at this time. > - samantha There are no specific points of your assessment I would quibble with. Appearances to the contrary, I don't actually care about Wal Mart one way or the other. I was simply using this high profile big business to make a number of points I think are important: 1) That arriving at the pinnacle of success (for a person) - or market power (for an organisation) does not make either the person, or the organisation, admirable. "Winners" are not to be adored as Darwinian success stories (especially if their 'wins' are only able to be appreciated in economic terms). Conservative capitalism's love of the big players is (I think) a form of false idolatry. Extrapolated to the extropian point of view - this means in my opinion that there is still plenty of scope for everything to go terribly wrong. If big business can be immoral, self-serving and parasitic - and presidents can be dumb and parochial - who knows what might happen? The question: Who will control the technology - and how will they do it? May well be the ultimate deciding factor between a bright enhanced future and interminable conflict or worse. I for one would not like a mega-corporation to exercise this kind of control. 2) There is too much facile acceptance of silly buzz-word ideas like: "Efficiency is keeping prices low," "Darwin asserts that the survivor is the best equipped to carry the torch," What's good for the economy is good for the country," "All competition is healthy" etc. There is no credit to be had for taking a 10 second sound-bite to be all inclusive wisdom. Catch-phrases are for air-heads and couch potatoes - serious people should be prepared to look at the in-depth argument or admit that Homer Simpson does it way better than they do. Extrapolated to the extropian point of view - this means in my opinion that the technological knowledge (ability) to do good or ill, may well arrive before we gain the maturity to deal intelligently with the choices it will give us - or the power to choose will be in the wrong hands. 3) Basic premises should be questioned occasionally. A lot of semantic baggage becomes attached to words over time. For example, words like "liberal" and "socialism" have quite different connotations for citizens of the US as compared with either Europeans, or for example, Australians. Extrapolated to the extropian point of view - this means (in my opinion) that communication of even quite basic ideas is hampered when - as I have seen on this list before - someone detects a word with a (gasp) "tinge of socialism" or some other semantic impurity that conjures strange local associations... I'll leave it to you to decide if this is the middle or the high ground. Jack Parkinson From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 19 11:49:49 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:49:49 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <7641ddc60511190220u5345b49es77b9d46f878f9176@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002001c5ecff$5ac01300$0201a8c0@JPAcer> > ### Jack, you are presenting, albeit in a simplified and watered-down > manner, communist ideology with which I have been well-acquainted at > school (a state-run, communist one) since before you were born. Communist ideology! Ok I get it - disagree with Rafal - you ARE a commie. PLUS - You HAVE disagreed - ergo... > I don't have to listen, because I considered it and rejected it about 30 > years ago. I wrote off the whole lot as a load of garbage and I don't > intend to wade through it again. Absolutely! Stick to your guns there Rafal... One crucial decision in 30 years is more than enough, a man can't be changing his mind every 5 minutes... Umm... 30 years... Can he? >My belief system is what happens once > a human rejects yours. Ouch! My belief system failed Rafal's Turing test... > I can only suggest you read some popular books on economics, starting > with Hazlitt's, try "The Undercover Economist", or any other popular > exposition of this science... Thank you (I won't say for your patronage). I'm a wiser, chastened, and more enlightened proto-commie than before. And I'll try to pass your ideological test. I'm just not sufficiently supple at present to insert my head into the required orifice. And one last thing. Quote: ...with which I have been well-acquainted at school (a state-run, communist one) since before you were born. Unquote. How do you know how old I am - you young whippersnapper? Jack Parkinson From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sat Nov 19 12:14:33 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:14:33 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] immortality will have to wait Message-ID: <003101c5ed02$ce8298f0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Geneticists claim ageing breakthrough but immortality will have to wait ? Organisms live six times longer in laboratory tests ? Cells genetically 'tricked' into slow-ageing mode The following link is from the Guardian newspaper in the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1645418,00.html?gusrc=rss Jack Parkinson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 19 15:18:44 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:18:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <000701c5ed1c$888a4f40$42bd1b97@administxl09yj> > My mind boggles as I try to understand: > why is it that the mirror reverses > left to right but not top to bottom? > spike Do not ask that! Even Kevin Brown looses his control speaking about these things on his site http://www.mathpages.com/home/ [search: mirror]. s. From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Nov 19 15:57:55 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 09:57:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst.org Conference Success In-Reply-To: <56e7a090817855462f32ae8814e05dd3@www.imminst.org> References: <56e7a090817855462f32ae8814e05dd3@www.imminst.org> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051119095524.02bd5a50@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 12:29 AM 11/13/2005, Bruce J. Klein wrote: >Conference Success! > >Speakers power points (13) are found here: >http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=SF&f=191 The page does not say specifically "Speakers' PowerPoint Presentations." You have to go to where it says, "Forum Topics" and locate each speaker and his/her presentation link. Thanks Bruce! Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 19 16:24:42 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:24:42 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] immortality will have to wait In-Reply-To: <003101c5ed02$ce8298f0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <200511191624.jAJGOge31524@tick.javien.com> ... ?Geneticists claim ageing breakthrough but immortality will have to wait ? Organisms live six times longer in laboratory tests ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1645418,00.html?gusrc=rss ? Jack Parkinson ? WHAT? I misread it. I thought they said orgasms were six time longer in laboratory tests. I was going to volunteer as a test rat. Organisms, forget it, never mind. spike From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 16:42:01 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 11:42:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051119005838.01d49be8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <010401c5ed28$4111d690$070a4e0c@MyComputer> "Damien Broderick" > Krauthammer was offering the soothing bromide that religion has nothing to > fear from science I agree it is a bromide, and for Krauthammer to say Einstein was religious because he would occasionally say things like "God does not play dice" is a little like saying I'm religious because when I hit my thumb with a hammer I say "God damn it". Nevertheless I'm pleased Krauthammer doesn't like (un) intelligent design, it's more than I expected, Charles Krauthammer recommends that scientists who save lives and relieve human suffering through therapeutic cloning be put to death. > Newton was *not* a supporter of the conventional state > religion of his day And if Newton had not keep his religious views secret he would have lost his job and probably been imprisoned. John K Clark From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 19 17:10:08 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:10:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <000701c5ed1c$888a4f40$42bd1b97@administxl09yj> References: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> <000701c5ed1c$888a4f40$42bd1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <20051119171008.GR2249@leitl.org> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 04:18:44PM +0100, scerir wrote: > > My mind boggles as I try to understand: > > why is it that the mirror reverses > > left to right but not top to bottom? > > spike Plenty of good explanations. http://www.google.com/search?q=mirror+reverse+right+left+up+down&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official A chirality inversion machine would be quite useful, and dangerous (inverting yourself at organ level is a good practical joke, but at molecular level a good way to starve/poison yourself, and at subparticle level a good way to blow up the countryside). > Do not ask that! Even Kevin Brown looses > his control speaking about these things > on his site http://www.mathpages.com/home/ > [search: mirror]. > s. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 17:51:13 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 12:51:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> Message-ID: <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson" "Winners" are not to be adored as Darwinian success stories Because evolution has been such a flop, producing only such minor things as bacteria, eukaryotes, multi celled organisms, you, me, and Wal-Mart. > especially if their 'wins' are only able to be appreciated in > economic terms Heaven forbid winning be judged on anything as objective and unambiguous as numbers. Something shouldn't be judged a winner just because it wins, what kind of silly reason is that? No, winners should be judged by the personal likes and dislikes of Jack Parkinson, or by people who have the exact same preferences as Jack Parkinson. Jack has graciously agreed to inform us when something is not allowed even though a lot of people want it and it will make a lot of people a lot of money because Jack has determined it will "hurt society", and we all know that Jack's voice speaks for society. So ignore the trillions of tiny economic decisions billions of people make every day, Jack is smarter than all of them put together. > Conservative capitalism's love of the big players is (I think) > a form of false idolatry. If you want to get rid of the capitalist "big players" (why you'd want to do that is beyond me) then you're going to need something even bigger to do it, HUGE government. > this means in my opinion that there is still plenty of scope for > everything to go terribly wrong. Boy are you ever right! It's interesting, for some reason people love to dwell on the bad things business has done, but if you put all the evil business has committed over the last century together in one big lump I can't find a word stronger than "naughty" to describe it compared to the horrors committed by government. Perhaps Wal-Mart hasn't treated its employees with enough consideration from time to time, but at least Wal-Mart doesn't push people into ovens. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 18:03:46 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:03:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mirrors (was: against ID) References: <200511190715.jAJ7FPe20121@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <014501c5ed33$9b0e7c60$070a4e0c@MyComputer> "spike" > My mind boggles as I try to understand: why > is it that the mirror reverses left to right but not > top to bottom? A mirror doesn't reverse left and right, it reverses front from back. Face north and move your east hand, the east hand in the mirror moves too, move your west hand, the west hand in the mirror moves too, but point to the front and the mirror man points to the back. John K Clark From HerbM at learnquick.com Sat Nov 19 18:20:04 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 12:20:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mirrors (was: against ID) In-Reply-To: <014501c5ed33$9b0e7c60$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: > "spike" > > > My mind boggles as I try to understand: why > > is it that the mirror reverses left to right but not > > top to bottom? > > A mirror doesn't reverse left and right, it reverses front > from back. Face > north and move your east hand, the east hand in the mirror > moves too, move > your west hand, the west hand in the mirror moves too, but > point to the > front and the mirror man points to the back. > > John K Clark Correct. And although John explained it nicely, it might be useful to note that "left-right" are terms relative to the point of view of someone (or something). Thus when you look in a mirror, your left hand image is still on YOUR LEFT. We just unconsciously assume that the image in the mirror is to be treated like we normally treat a real person; in the case of a real person (not a front/back reversed image) we change the point of reference (implicitly) when speaking of "left hand" or "right hand" even though we also know implicitly that the person we are facing has the "left hand" on OUR own right side due to the difference in orientation. This is also the reason that sailors and aviators use Port and Starboard to fix the concept of 'sides'. By using common reference (the vessel or aircraft), rather than the direction some particular person is facing, or even the particular direction traveling from moment in regards to another particular time. (I.E., a ship might turn around but the reference is still to the bow-stern line rather than direction of travel, e.g., north-south.) -- Herb Martin From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 19 18:26:04 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 10:26:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] bug evolution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511191826.jAJIQFe09282@tick.javien.com> ... > after which the front is covered with smashed bees (their guts are > yellow)... Why is that? Whenever a mammal is slain upon the freeway, its innards are red. But any flying insect that smashes upon one's windshield is universally yellow inside, sometimes with a streak of red, which we might assume is blood similar to mammalian blood. We can imagine that insects need less blood, since they get oxygen to their organs primarily by diffusion. We can also suppose that whatever that yellow goo is inside all insects must be approximately the same stuff, extrapolating from the notion that the stuff inside all mammals is approximately the same. Has anyone seen bug guts any other color besides yellow? Why yellow? spike From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 18:43:39 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:43:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mirrors (was: against ID) References: Message-ID: <015c01c5ed39$350d25a0$070a4e0c@MyComputer> "Herb Martin" > "left-right" are terms relative to > the point of view of someone (or something). Until 1957 everybody thought that was correct but then C. N. Yang and T. D. Lee showed that it was not, left and right are absolute concepts. They got a Noble prize in Physics just for telling their left from their right. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 19 18:52:30 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:52:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] bug evolution References: <200511191826.jAJIQFe09282@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <016901c5ed3a$695ff6b0$070a4e0c@MyComputer> "spike" > Why is that? Whenever a mammal is slain upon the freeway, its innards are > red. But any flying insect that smashes upon one's windshield is > universally yellow inside Insect blood moves nutrients but not oxygen as in mammalian blood, insects are so small that oxygen can just defuse into the insect cells. The iron in hemoglobin is replaced with copper in insects hence the different color. John K Clark From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com Sat Nov 19 19:03:22 2005 From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:03:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Nov 19, 2005, at 1:57 AM, gts wrote: > Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if > my old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. > I've been away from this discussion list for a couple of years. > > Is there a consensus here on this subject? Unless you rename "Intelligent Design" to "Simulation Argument". If the "Intelligent Designer" is a computer simulator, and all creation is a simulation, then you will not find quite as strong or as univerasal opposition among transhumanists. Many can and do argue that we must at least consider the possibility that we are living inside a simulation created by some intelligent design. How this differs from ID, I don't see. But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the Simulation Argument. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 950 bytes Desc: not available URL: From HerbM at learnquick.com Sat Nov 19 19:11:37 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:11:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mirrors (was: against ID) In-Reply-To: <015c01c5ed39$350d25a0$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: > > "left-right" are terms relative to > > the point of view of someone (or something). > > Until 1957 everybody thought that was correct but then C. N. > Yang and T. D. > Lee showed that it was not, left and right are absolute > concepts. They got a > Noble prize in Physics just for telling their left from their right. > Different context -- we were discussing left hand and right hand. -- Herb Martin From HerbM at learnquick.com Sat Nov 19 19:16:42 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:16:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Nov 19, 2005, at 1:57 AM, gts wrote: Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if my old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. I've been away from this discussion list for a couple of years. Is there a consensus here on this subject? Unless you rename "Intelligent Design" to "Simulation Argument". If the "Intelligent Designer" is a computer simulator, and all creation is a simulation, then you will not find quite as strong or as univerasal opposition among transhumanists. Many can and do argue that we must at least consider the possibility that we are living inside a simulation created by some intelligent design. How this differs from ID, I don't see. But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the Simulation Argument. -- Harvey Newstrom This is one of the problems with teaching intelligent design in an science class -- whatever evidence there might be would NOT likely point to some particular mythology but rather to scientific explanations for who/what might be designing or 'running' our world and these would likely arrive at the explanation of a computer simulation by "godlike scientists" (from our point of view) or perhaps a young god-like being playing with the "universal simulator program" he just received for his birthday.... Explained scientifically, ID would make just about everyone who is arguing for its teaching really angry. -- Herb Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 19:26:32 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:26:32 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990511191126m201b0536l420d2e7a70bfbaeb@mail.gmail.com> On 11/19/05, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > Many can and do argue that we must at > least consider the possibility that we are living inside a simulation > created by some intelligent design. How this differs from ID, I don't > see. It differs because the simulation argument doesn't says that the designer is some mysterious supernatural entity, but is more probably some green giant-sized insect, who lives in an universe at least complex as our own, to which the simulation argument also applies. Alfio From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 19 20:20:27 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:20:27 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 02:03:22PM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the > Simulation Argument. Not this transhumanist. Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in SA in a strong sense? I.e., would you be willing to bet your life on it? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Nov 19 20:52:28 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:52:28 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain><002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer><00b701c5e722$0d839a40$8998e03c@homepc> <00f101c5e7ad$6e55c380$d6054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <06fa01c5ed4b$276d6ce0$8998e03c@homepc> John K Clark wrote: > "Brett Paatsch" > >> You're the guy that thinks international law is pure farce as I >> recall > > I don't quite see the connection with 7 cent an hour sweatshops > but yes, I do seem to recall saying something along those lines. You'd introduced the question of morality and whether you were a villain. What about domestic law is that farce too? If you make a contract do you think you should keep you side of the deal? >> because there is no force behind it. > > Well, if policemen had no guns and no arms, or legs, and were blind > and deaf, and a burglar broke into your home, would you call the > police of reach for your gun? No, neither. Don't own a gun (I likely wouldn't need one for the sort of burglar that would be dumb enough to try to rob me when I was at home). The policemen you describe don't sound like any policemen I'd recognize as policemen. >>the reason there is no force behind it is because at this stage in human >>history the force of international law depends largely on the honour and >>intellect of you and your countrymen. > > Yes, things would be much more honorable and intelligent if the UN > ran the world, the organization that picked Libya (of Lockerbie fame) > to run the Human Rights Commission. " Things " ? I've been watching some of your discussion with Jack. You keep pulling this sort of switch. Libya's villainy doesn't make you or the US honourable, your honour or villainy turns on what *you* do. As a citizen of the US you are, for now, able to enjoy some human rights benefits you haven't had to personally earn. What could possibly be your point in pointing at Libya? That because Libya (of Lockerbie) fame can't be trusted to run a Human Rights Commission that *you* are absolved from all responsibilities in the area of human rights? That that is the whole human rights question dealt with and that you may now get on with the pressing business of screwing other people for 7 cents an hour in a nasty Hobbesian world while the bleeding heart lefties take themselves out of that game because they haven't the stomach for it? >> Would you want to reanimate some smo who in the era of >> slavery spent most of his effort saying his slaves ought be >> delighted at their good fortune > > If he also had a practical workable plan that would eliminate > slavery I would pick him in a instant over a person who blubbered > and cried and flogged himself with whips to demonstrate to the > world how profoundly he hated slavery but who's advice was so > incredibly mind numbingly stupid it would actually strengthen that > diabolical institution. So do you have a practical workable plan to eliminate sweat shops? I must have missed that part of your argument. >> Fuck John, you are not a bad guy. But so far as I can see you >> are not by any obvious criteria a good one (one that the future >> is likely to feel motivated to expend some positive effort to have >> around) either. > > Face it, there is precious little reason a Jupiter Brain would bother > bringing anybody alive now back. Maybe we'd have a very tiny > nostalgia value to Mr. Jupiter, or maybe he'd do it just for laughs > because it will either be absolutely imposable or dirt cheap. I do face it. Its you that seems to hope that you might be of some appeal to it and be the beneficiary of its charity. Its you that is creating the very world that you'd personally need to avoid. Without respect for law, exactly how is your ethos any different from that of a looter? Brett Paatsch From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 20:55:45 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:55:45 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4902d9990511191255x6fe26369h409e670643345600@mail.gmail.com> On 11/19/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > SA in a strong sense? in a very weak sense, maybe... let's say it's something i would not exclude a priori. > I.e., would you be willing to bet your life on it? of course not. Alfio From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Nov 19 21:48:12 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:48:12 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <22360fa10511191348m169f9503keb001ace359d27a9@mail.gmail.com> On 11/19/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 02:03:22PM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > > But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the > > Simulation Argument. > > Not this transhumanist. > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > SA in a strong sense? I.e., would you be willing to bet your life > on it? > I see no evidence to support any strong belief that we are living in a simulation. It seems unlikely to me from the standpoint of efficient use of computing resources. Nick Bostrom, credited with the Simulation Argument says the following in his FAQ: "The argument only shows that at least one of three possibilities obtains, but it does not tell us which one(s). One can thus accept the simulation argument and reject the simulation hypothesis (i.e. that we are in a simulation)." "Personally, I assign less than 50% probability to the simulation hypothesis ? rather something like 20%." - Jef From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Nov 19 22:06:29 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 09:06:29 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <074301c5ed55$7e69e780$8998e03c@homepc> Eugen wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 02:03:22PM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > > > But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the > > Simulation Argument. > > Not this transhumanist. > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > SA in a strong sense? I.e., would you be willing to bet your life > on it? I think Harvey makes a good point. Eugen, aren't you conflating creationism with numerology? On your sliding scale of belief, exactly how strong is strong? Or does the word "strong" relate not to the belief (which is binary one either has it or doesn't) but to the SA like say hard relates to a "hard takeoff"? Brett Paatsch From eugen at leitl.org Sat Nov 19 22:27:00 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:27:00 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <074301c5ed55$7e69e780$8998e03c@homepc> References: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> <074301c5ed55$7e69e780$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051119222700.GD2249@leitl.org> On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:06:29AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > I think Harvey makes a good point. So do I. > Eugen, aren't you conflating creationism with numerology? On your sliding > scale of belief, exactly how strong is strong? I have no idea what you're talking about. > Or does the word "strong" relate not to the belief (which is binary one Why should belief be boolean? > either has it or doesn't) but to the SA like say hard relates to a "hard > takeoff"? There's zero evidence for SA. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 19 22:30:34 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:30:34 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] bug evolution In-Reply-To: <016901c5ed3a$695ff6b0$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200511192230.jAJMUSe28909@tick.javien.com> > The iron in > hemoglobin is replaced with copper in insects hence the different color. Copper! I'll be damned, I never knew that. I was wondering what one could use bugs for if one were to be able to somehow collect a few tons of them, such as by building a giant net that sweeps over a cornfield. I had in mind processing them into food for shrimp and crabs, but it isn't clear what that would do to the taste of the meat. But if it didn't harm the meat, then one might be able to collect the waste products of the shrimp or crab farms, then chemically extract the copper for less than the cost of mining copper the usual way. Thanks John! spike From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Nov 19 22:36:08 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 09:36:08 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org><074301c5ed55$7e69e780$8998e03c@homepc> <20051119222700.GD2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <076b01c5ed59$a2613900$8998e03c@homepc> Eugen wrote: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:06:29AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > > I think Harvey makes a good point. > > So do I. > > > Eugen, aren't you conflating creationism with numerology? On your > > sliding scale of belief, exactly how strong is strong? > > I have no idea what you're talking about. See below. > > Or does the word "strong" relate not to the belief (which is binary one > Why should belief be boolean? Show me an example of when it isn't and I'll show you someone *trying* to reason rather than merely believing. > > either has it or doesn't) but to the SA like say hard relates to a "hard > > takeoff"? > > There's zero evidence for SA. Hal's (from memory) was right its an argument not a hypothesis. Brett Paatsch From pharos at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 23:32:23 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:32:23 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] bug evolution In-Reply-To: <200511192230.jAJMUSe28909@tick.javien.com> References: <016901c5ed3a$695ff6b0$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <200511192230.jAJMUSe28909@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/19/05, spike wrote: > > The iron in > > hemoglobin is replaced with copper in insects hence the different color. > > Copper! I'll be damned, I never knew that. I was > wondering what one could use bugs for if one were > to be able to somehow collect a few tons of them, > such as by building a giant net that sweeps over a > cornfield. I had in mind processing them into > food for shrimp and crabs, but it isn't clear what > that would do to the taste of the meat. But if > it didn't harm the meat, then one might be able > to collect the waste products of the shrimp or > crab farms, then chemically extract the copper > for less than the cost of mining copper the > usual way. Thanks John! > Don't worry spike. You never knew that because it isn't quite correct. :) Try googling on insect blood. In insects, the blood (more properly called hemolymph) is not involved in the transport of oxygen. (Openings called tracheae allow oxygen from the air to diffuse directly to the tissues). Insect blood moves nutrients to the tissues and removes waste products. So insect blood doesn't need iron or copper. The greenish or yellowish color of insect blood comes from the pigments of the plants the bug eats. Of course, if a recently fed mosquito splats on your windscreen, it will be full of red animal blood. :) Quote: Small invertebrates In some small invertebrates, oxygen is simply dissolved in the plasma. All other animals use respiratory proteins to increase the oxygen carrying capacity. Hemoglobin is the most efficient respiratory protein found in nature. Hemocyanin (blue) contains copper and is used in crustaceans or mollusks. Sea squirts, among other marine life, use a vanadium chromagen (bright green, blue, or orange) for its respiratory pigment. In many invertebrates, these oxygen-carrying proteins are freely soluble in the blood; in vertebrates they are contained in specialized red blood cells, allowing for a higher concentration of respiratory pigments without increasing viscosity. BillK From jonano at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 23:22:41 2005 From: jonano at gmail.com (Jonathan Despres) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:22:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? Message-ID: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in the vitamin business), here is my opinion: 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a trade minimum to do) 2) We need talented people to do the essential job 3) We need a good image/reputation 4) We need a good product. Any other thing I miss ? --Jon From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 00:13:29 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:13:29 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/19/05, Jonathan Despres wrote: > > Hi, > > I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in > the vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a > trade minimum to do) > > 2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > 3) We need a good image/reputation > > 4) We need a good product. > > Any other thing I miss ? > Hype, high profile clients, targetted advertising. See how Scientology did it. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Nov 20 00:18:27 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 11:18:27 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <07bf01c5ed67$edf72a60$8998e03c@homepc> Jonathan Despres wrote: > Hi, > > I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in > the vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a > trade minimum to do) > > 2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > 3) We need a good image/reputation > > 4) We need a good product. > > Any other thing I miss ? Well I assume you've already read Michael Porter's books on Competitive Advantage and Competitive Strategy. I get my vitamins in the form of meat, dairy, fruit and veg from my local supermarket. What vitamins are you selling? Do you *really* *really* believe in your product? Brett Paatsch From joel.pitt at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 00:17:18 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Pitt) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 13:17:18 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437FC08E.2020404@gmail.com> You need to get an established customer base that will come back to you in the future when they need to restock their vitamin/supplement supplies. You should also look at trying to provide hard to get supplements to seperate yourself from the existing masses of vitamin businesses. Say certified vegetarian alternatives to vitamins/minerals usually extracted from the left overs of the meat business. You can then justify charging more for targetted products. -Joel Jonathan Despres wrote: > Hi, > > I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in > the vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a > trade minimum to do) > > 2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > 3) We need a good image/reputation > > 4) We need a good product. > > Any other thing I miss ? > > --Jon > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- What a strange machine man is. You fill him with bread, wine, fish, and radishes, and out come sighs, laughter and dreams. - Nikos Kazantzakis From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sun Nov 20 00:30:15 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:30:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437FC397.7030808@goldenfuture.net> 5) You need to have a compelling argument for why I should buy vitamins from your company, rather than one of your competitors (or, in my case, from the places I already buy vitamins and supplements). Joseph Jonathan Despres wrote: >Hi, > >I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in >the vitamin business), here is my opinion: > >1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a >trade minimum to do) > >2) We need talented people to do the essential job > >3) We need a good image/reputation > >4) We need a good product. > >Any other thing I miss ? > >--Jon >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 00:35:04 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:35:04 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <437FC08E.2020404@gmail.com> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <437FC08E.2020404@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/20/05, Joel Pitt wrote: > > You need to get an established customer base that will come back to you > in the future when they need to restock their vitamin/supplement supplies. > > You should also look at trying to provide hard to get supplements to > seperate yourself from the existing masses of vitamin businesses. Say > certified vegetarian alternatives to vitamins/minerals usually extracted > from the left overs of the meat business. You can then justify charging > more for targetted products. > > Also stock some of the more unusual, low demand, items. People who buy those will also tend to buy the other stuff along with it. Also, and this is something that has anoyed me in the past, be prepared to sell the *pure* product. Too often the chemicals I wanted have been adulterated with other crap and made into tablets or other 'value added' junk. When I buy stuff, be it vitamin E or caffeine, I want it in grams and 99%+ pure. That's very difficult to find here from a normal supplier and I have had to get it from chemical supply houses in the past. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Nov 20 00:39:10 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:39:10 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <437FC397.7030808@goldenfuture.net> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <437FC397.7030808@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <22360fa10511191639n63e2ce6j3b6e565bd368e573@mail.gmail.com> (5a) You need to establish and maintain a good reputation so that potential customers will believe (with reasonable probability) that you are trustworthy with regard to their money and product quality. - Jef On 11/19/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > 5) You need to have a compelling argument for why I should buy vitamins > from your company, rather than one of your competitors (or, in my case, > from the places I already buy vitamins and supplements). > > Joseph > > Jonathan Despres wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in > >the vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > > >1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a > >trade minimum to do) > > > >2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > > >3) We need a good image/reputation > > > >4) We need a good product. > > > >Any other thing I miss ? > > > >--Jon > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Sun Nov 20 01:38:14 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 09:38:14 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Big business being naughty Message-ID: <002d01c5ed73$21101050$0901a8c0@EF02jack> John K Clark said: >It's interesting, for some reason people love to >dwell on the bad things business has done, but if you put all the evil >business has committed over the last century together in one big lump I >can't find a word stronger than "naughty" to describe it compared to the >horrors committed by government. Perhaps Wal-Mart hasn't treated >its employees with enough consideration from time to time, but at >least Wal-Mart doesn't push people into ovens. >John K Clark Mmm... some of that naughtiness was a bit extreme. Bayer for instance. As well as inventing Aspirin, they also trademarked Heroin and sold it in several European countries in the early part of last century as a cure for headaches and a 'safe pacifier' for mothers to give their babies. Bayer avidly supported Hitler and DID push people into ovens. During WWII they operated their own corporate death camp and employed the infamous Dr Mengele to perform often lethal medical experiments (generally without anaesthetic) on hapless prisoners. That was VERY naughty I think. One of their directors was executed for it at the Nuremberg war trials, a number of others got long prison terms. Check the Bayer opposition shareholders website for details. We won't mention the murky pasts of Toyota, Mitsubishi, Volkswagen - or the violence of the private African armies known - not without reason by the locals who live in fear of them - as the 'death squads' of the big oil companies... Practically every multinational has a criminal record: http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/ and some, (many of them) have been convicted for more than just slipping folding money into a brown paper bag. Death, destruction, mutilation and mayhem are not hard to find in the naughtiness of big business in the last 100 years... Jack Parkinson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Nov 20 02:00:15 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:00:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00c501c5ed76$3145f7c0$74550318@ZANDRA2> I'd add the following although I don't disagree with any of your high level goals. These goals could vary depending on the size of your enterprise. 5. A good IT group to give you a net presence and minimize the expenses of running your operation from inventory control, manufacturing and accounting perspective. 6. A just in time inventory system to reduce your inventory carrying cost and reduce spoilage in the vitamin ingredients that have a short shelf life. Also consider coatings which could delay oxidation of ingredients. I hate it when my vitamins go bad and I half to hold my breath when I take them. And no I'm not going to throw away $20 woth of vitamins just because they smell bad. 7. A quality control lab to perform receiving inspection on your ingredients to protect your image/reputation and to protect your company from liability. (Remembering GNC L-Tryptophen disaster from years back) 8. A good work environment, fair pay, benefits and background checks to reduce likelihood of product tampering, employee theft, extreme addiction problems, etc... again to protect image/reputation and liability costs. 9. A five year business plan which will allow you plan for growth, obtain credit for expansion, and allow you to value your business for insurance purposes or potential sale. 10. A R&D group to devise vitamin combinations to reduce the number of pills people need to take each morning for specific consumer problems and/or gender/age groups. This also serves to differentiate your line vitamins from those of your competition. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Despres Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:23 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? Hi, I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in the vitamin business), here is my opinion: 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a trade minimum to do) 2) We need talented people to do the essential job 3) We need a good image/reputation 4) We need a good product. Any other thing I miss ? --Jon _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 20 02:14:30 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (jonkc at att.net) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 02:14:30 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) Message-ID: <112020050214.10646.437FDC06000404290000299621603763160C05020106@att.net> -------------- "Brett Paatsch" : -- >You'd introduced the question of morality and whether you were a villain. Yes but what has that to do with the fact that I said international law is a farce What about domestic law is that farce too? No, there is enforcement behind that. >Without respect for law, I didn?t say I don?t respect the law, I said without enforcement it?s not a law at all, it?s just some guy saying don?t do something. >exactly how is your ethos any different from that of a looter? A looter always causes grief to somebody who does not deserve it, a violator of international law may or may not do so depending on the law. Another difference is that as a looter a policeman might shoot me, but international law has no policeman. .> As a citizen of the US you are, for now, able to enjoy some human rights benefits you haven't had to personally earn. I do not feel that the government has done me an enormous favor by not taking away all my human rights. > What could possibly be your point in pointing at Libya? That because Libya (of Lockerbie) fame can't be trusted to run a Human Rights Commission Good boy, you answered your own question, keep using the old noggin like that and you won?t have to keep asking me questions. > So do you have a practical workable plan to eliminate sweat shops? I don?t want to eliminate sweatshops, I want to eliminate poverty, and my plan is one that has already worked in South Korea, Japan, Formosa, and large parts of China. >Its you that seems to hope that you might be of some appeal to it and be the beneficiary of its charity. Everybody hopes for charity when they get into a jam they can?t get out of themselves, but that doesn?t mean I expect it or think I deserve it. >Its you that is creating the very world that you'd personally need to avoid. Huh? John K Clark r -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alito at organicrobot.com Sun Nov 20 02:30:16 2005 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:30:16 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <4902d9990511191255x6fe26369h409e670643345600@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> <4902d9990511191255x6fe26369h409e670643345600@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1132453817.22324.4.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Sat, 2005-11-19 at 21:55 +0100, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On 11/19/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > > SA in a strong sense? > > in a very weak sense, maybe... let's say it's something i would not > exclude a priori. > > > I.e., would you be willing to bet your life on it? > > of course not. x 2 From riel at surriel.com Sun Nov 20 04:07:03 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:07:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com> <014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > Boy are you ever right! It's interesting, for some reason people love to > dwell on the bad things business has done, but if you put all the evil > business has committed over the last century together in one big lump I > can't find a word stronger than "naughty" to describe it compared to the > horrors committed by government. One thing that happened around 100 years ago in the area where I was born is that companies paid employees not in money but in coupons, which could only be spent at (overpriced) company stores. This practice has luckily been outlawed in most of the world by now. I have read some reports that sweatshops operated by certain companies, mostly in China, are reinstating a similar policy. Their "employees" are obliged to live in overcrowded company "housing" for which they are charged rent, and are overcharged for their food. They need to work one normal western working day just to break even and end up taking home way less than minimum wage... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From mfj.eav at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 04:43:42 2005 From: mfj.eav at gmail.com (Morris Johnson) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:43:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <00c501c5ed76$3145f7c0$74550318@ZANDRA2> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <00c501c5ed76$3145f7c0$74550318@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <61c8738e0511192043x1ddfa935g86c2758d535312fd@mail.gmail.com> Hve not read all the content but have a few comments to add: JD lives in Canada as do I and that limits the novelty of the products he can sell. As of Jan 01 all products must have NHPD product licences and any mfg must be site licenced. GMP and SOP's acceptable to Health Canada must be submitted alon with a product specific data set. Staff must have edu standing commensurate with their job capacity and a QA officer must sign off on all apps. This means the ante in $$$ is going up a fair bit. Reselling HC licenced NHP's is the only option. I say this because I have spent the last months getting up to spec with what is required and will have to take 4 months of HACCP training to get up to the barest of bones QA signoff level. However there are loopholes.. the custom compounding of NHP's from raw ingredients is one. All the other basic business rules then apply otherwise. Morris Johnson ... On 11/19/05, Gary Miller wrote: > > > I'd add the following although I don't disagree with any of your high > level > goals. These goals could vary depending on the size of your enterprise. > > 5. A good IT group to give you a net presence and minimize the expenses of > running your operation from inventory control, manufacturing and > accounting > perspective. > > 6. A just in time inventory system to reduce your inventory carrying cost > and reduce spoilage in the vitamin ingredients that have a short shelf > life. > Also consider coatings which could delay oxidation of ingredients. I hate > it when my vitamins go bad and I half to hold my breath when I take them. > And no I'm not going to throw away $20 woth of vitamins just because they > smell bad. > > 7. A quality control lab to perform receiving inspection on your > ingredients > to protect your image/reputation and to protect your company from > liability. > (Remembering GNC L-Tryptophen disaster from years back) > > 8. A good work environment, fair pay, benefits and background checks to > reduce likelihood of product tampering, employee theft, extreme addiction > problems, etc... again to protect image/reputation and liability costs. > > 9. A five year business plan which will allow you plan for growth, obtain > credit for expansion, and allow you to value your business for insurance > purposes or potential sale. > > 10. A R&D group to devise vitamin combinations to reduce the number of > pills > people need to take each morning for specific consumer problems and/or > gender/age groups. This also serves to differentiate your line vitamins > from those of your competition. > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan > Despres > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:23 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? > > Hi, > > I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in the > vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is a trade > minimum to do) > > 2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > 3) We need a good image/reputation > > 4) We need a good product. > > Any other thing I miss ? > > --Jon > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc. Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. Mission: To Preserve, Protect and Enhance Lifespan Plant-based Natural-health Bio-product Bio-pharmaceuticals http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan http://www.4XtraLifespans.bravehost.com megao at sasktel.net, arla_j at hotmail.com, mfj.eav at gmail.com extropian.pharmer at gmail.com Extreme Life-Extension ..."The most dangerous idea on earth" -Leon Kass , Bioethics Advisor to George Herbert Walker Bush, June 2005 Radical Life-Extension Bioscience + Total Information Awareness Globalized Info-science = The 21st Century Paradigm ........ Re-inventing the Human Condition with Quantum to Macro Biomolecular-engineering *"I will live each and every 50 years, one at a time, like the days of a week".... Morris Johnson - June 2005* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 20 06:01:25 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 01:01:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:02:05 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > In general if a worker is only worth 5$ an hour to his employer that > employer hewill never pay him more than that unless he is running a > charity; and if there isa law that says he MUST pay 6$ an hour then he > will simply hire nobody. More likely he will pay the 6$, raise prices to cover his increased costs, and hope his competitors are forced to do the same. -gts From eugen at leitl.org Sun Nov 20 06:41:09 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:41:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <07bf01c5ed67$edf72a60$8998e03c@homepc> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <07bf01c5ed67$edf72a60$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051120064109.GN2249@leitl.org> On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 11:18:27AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > What vitamins are you selling? Do you *really* *really* believe > in your product? Before you all spend too much time giving advice to Jonathan Despres I recommend reading a few relevant threads on http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/ (which is a useful resource to plug here on its own right, especially now since CryoNet has gone to the dogs). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From neuronexmachina at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 08:15:41 2005 From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:15:41 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <20051120064109.GN2249@leitl.org> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <07bf01c5ed67$edf72a60$8998e03c@homepc> <20051120064109.GN2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/19/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 11:18:27AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > > What vitamins are you selling? Do you *really* *really* believe > > in your product? > > Before you all spend too much time giving advice to Jonathan > Despres I recommend reading a few relevant threads on > http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/ > (which is a useful resource to plug here on its own right, > especially now since CryoNet has gone to the dogs). What do you want to bet that every person who responded to his email is going to be listed on his company's "Board of Advisors"? http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/thread/1131337634/More+fraudulent+Despres+Advisors+%26amp%3B+Directors -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dmasten at piratelabs.org Sun Nov 20 08:30:59 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:30:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 01:01 -0500, gts wrote: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:02:05 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > > In general if a worker is only worth 5$ an hour to his employer that > > employer hewill never pay him more than that unless he is running a > > charity; and if there isa law that says he MUST pay 6$ an hour then he > > will simply hire nobody. > > More likely he will pay the 6$, raise prices to cover his increased costs, > and hope his competitors are forced to do the same. Reality is somewhere in the middle. John is right that those workers who are not worth $6/hr will be laid off, but many of the $5/hr workers will be worth $6/hr. The demand for labor will decrease and since price is fixed at a lower bound, some workers will be laid off. Since Wal*Mart is coming under fire for low wages, they are lobbying for a much higher minimum wage. Doing some googling, it looks like Wal*Mart is pretty middle of the road for non-union general merchandise retail wages. A higher minimum wage will hurt competitors, such as Target, enough that Wal*Mart will be able to raise prices and survive. -- David Masten From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 10:13:52 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:13:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, David Masten wrote: Doing some googling, it looks like Wal*Mart > is pretty middle of the road for non-union general merchandise retail > wages. A higher minimum wage will hurt competitors, such as Target, > enough that Wal*Mart will be able to raise prices and survive. ### Yeah, isn't it interesting that the commies don't go Target-bashing? It may have something to do with the slightly more upscale image of Target, and the feeling that Wal-Mart is more for rural rednecks. Urban upper- and mid-middle class commies despise rednecks. Rafal From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Nov 20 12:07:30 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:07:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> Does it matter if there is a consensus or not? - s On Nov 18, 2005, at 10:57 PM, gts wrote: > Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it > if my old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I > am. I've been away from this discussion list for a couple of years. > > Is there a consensus here on this subject? > > -gts > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 12:11:26 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:11:26 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/20/05, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On 11/20/05, David Masten wrote: > Urban upper- and mid-middle class commies despise > rednecks. > We need another rule like the Hitler rule. When Rafal calls all the people who disagree with him 'commies' then the discussion is over. Especially 'upper-class commies' !!! :) BillK From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Nov 20 12:27:47 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:27:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) In-Reply-To: <001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer> References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com> <006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <4CDF6226-6492-4929-96B7-50DE38C8FE3A@mac.com> <001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <13776929-0320-4809-9D81-6AA40C0600C7@mac.com> On Nov 19, 2005, at 2:42 AM, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: Samantha Atkins > To: Jack Parkinson > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 10:14 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was > the 7 cents thread) > > >>>> After watching this "debate" for some time I don't think you >>>> have a lot of high ground to preach >>>from, Jack. >>>> - samantha >>>> > > > >>> Well, I'm listening. And I AM interested in hearing your point of >>> view. >>> And for the record, I was looking for the middle ground rather >>> than the high ground... >>> > > >>> ...What exactly is your point of view? >>> > > >> On WalMart my opinion is mixed. The company has done a >> magnificent job of creating one of the >world's most sophisticated >> business organizations. The level of innovation and integration of >> >countless systems, components, business units and resources is >> not easily matched by any other >company. The WalMart success is >> about a lot more than foreign and domestic exploitation. On >the >> other hand, there have been a goodly number of abuses >> successfully claimed against the >company. The superstores do >> tend to drive out a lot of other businesses simply on the basis of >> >unbeatable price. These businesses in turn employ people. Many >> of them cannot afford to work >at a WalMart and have no desire to >> work in the WalMart environment. >> > > >> I don't believe that there is a definitive answer as to what "to >> do about" WalMart. Real abuses of >existing law should be noted >> and prosecuted. But I don't see any reasonable new forms of >> >legislation that it would be a net win to impose on them at this >> time. >> > > There are no specific points of your assessment I would quibble > with. Appearances to the contrary, I don't actually care about Wal > Mart one way or the other. I was simply using this high profile big > business to make a number of points I think are important: > > 1) That arriving at the pinnacle of success (for a person) - or > market power (for an organisation) does not make either the person, > or the organisation, admirable. "Winners" are not to be adored as > Darwinian success stories (especially if their 'wins' are only able > to be appreciated in economic terms). Conservative capitalism's > love of the big players is (I think) a form of false idolatry. It takes many quite admirable qualities to "arrive at the pinnacle of success". Darwin has very little to do with it and in context you display prejudice to interject Darwin here. Bigness per se also has little to do with success. > Extrapolated to the extropian point of view - this means in my > opinion that there is still plenty of scope for everything to go > terribly wrong. If big business can be immoral, self-serving and > parasitic - and presidents can be dumb and parochial - who knows > what might happen? Business cannot be truly amoral without going out of business unless propped up by government, i.e., by physical force. I do not agree that business, big or otherwise, is generally parasitic. Business is by definition "self-serving" but if done rationally that is not only not a breach of morality in my thinking, it is essential to morality. > The question: Who will control the technology - and how will they > do it? May well be the ultimate deciding factor between a bright > enhanced future and interminable conflict or worse. I for one would > not like a mega-corporation to exercise this kind of control. > I doubt very much that any centralized group will or can "control the technology". I don't consider the question particularly relevant. > 2) There is too much facile acceptance of silly buzz-word ideas > like: "Efficiency is keeping prices low," Do you deny that the price is directly correlated with efficiency of production and distribution? > "Darwin asserts that the survivor is the best equipped to carry the > torch," Darwin asserted no such thing when applied to general business. > What's good for the economy is good for the country," This is true but most people are very confused about what is actually good ofr the economy or as to what they mean by "economy". > "All competition is healthy" etc. All competition under rules that outlaw the initiation of force is generally healthy in economic and many other activities. > There is no credit to be had for taking a 10 second sound-bite to > be all inclusive wisdom. There is no credit in denigrating others with a straw man argument. > Catch-phrases are for air-heads and couch potatoes - serious people > should be prepared to look at the in-depth argument or admit that > Homer Simpson does it way better than they do. OK. I agree with Rafal and others here. What you are doing is not reasoned argument. Later. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Nov 20 12:45:46 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:45:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Nov 19, 2005, at 11:03 AM, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > Unless you rename "Intelligent Design" to "Simulation Argument". > If the "Intelligent Designer" is a computer simulator, and all > creation is a simulation, then you will not find quite as strong or > as univerasal opposition among transhumanists. Many can and do > argue that we must at least consider the possibility that we are > living inside a simulation created by some intelligent design. How > this differs from ID, I don't see. But many transhumanists do > believe in ID in the guise of the Simulation Argument. > But none of us suggests that the Simulation Argument be taught alongside evolution in biology class. AFAIK none of us have suggested that the Simulation Argument explains any of observed reality better than a non-SA set of explanations. As Eliezer pointed out once, coming up with a plausible notion that does not violate known facts is not sufficient to claim the notion is true or even likely. It merely says it is not impossible.If the SA is true and the SA created this universe (the SA has to have come from some timeline of some universe) or at least earth life, then it was a very deistic arrangement where the SA set up a very messy large- scale GA and took a look now and then to see if anything interesting turned up. Biological evolution is not in the least questioned by such speculation. So I do not agree that transhumanists who hold that SA is likely believe in a form of ID. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Nov 20 12:58:58 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:58:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? In-Reply-To: <61c8738e0511192043x1ddfa935g86c2758d535312fd@mail.gmail.com> References: <6030482a0511191522g1479e402tc5e27ee80bd09791@mail.gmail.com> <00c501c5ed76$3145f7c0$74550318@ZANDRA2> <61c8738e0511192043x1ddfa935g86c2758d535312fd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Nonsense like this is one of the reasons I will not consider emigration to Canada. However Canadians seem to have a delightful propensity to tell their government to buzz off when it gets too wacky. - s On Nov 19, 2005, at 8:43 PM, Morris Johnson wrote: > Hve not read all the content but have a few comments to add: > > JD lives in Canada as do I and that limits the > novelty of the products he can sell. > > As of Jan 01 all products must have NHPD > product licences and any mfg must be site licenced. > GMP and SOP's acceptable to Health Canada > must be submitted alon with a product specific data set. Staff must > have edu standing commensurate > with their job capacity and a QA officer must sign off > on all apps. > > This means the ante in $$$ is going up a fair bit. > > Reselling HC licenced NHP's is the only option. > > I say this because I have spent the last months > getting up to spec with what is required and will have to > take 4 months of HACCP training to get up to the barest of bones QA > signoff level. > > However there are loopholes.. the custom > compounding of NHP's from raw ingredients is one. > > All the other basic business rules then apply otherwise. > > > Morris Johnson > > ... > > > On 11/19/05, Gary Miller wrote: > > I'd add the following although I don't disagree with any of your > high level > goals. These goals could vary depending on the size of your > enterprise. > > 5. A good IT group to give you a net presence and minimize the > expenses of > running your operation from inventory control, manufacturing and > accounting > perspective. > > 6. A just in time inventory system to reduce your inventory > carrying cost > and reduce spoilage in the vitamin ingredients that have a short > shelf life. > Also consider coatings which could delay oxidation of > ingredients. I hate > it when my vitamins go bad and I half to hold my breath when I take > them. > And no I'm not going to throw away $20 woth of vitamins just > because they > smell bad. > > 7. A quality control lab to perform receiving inspection on your > ingredients > to protect your image/reputation and to protect your company from > liability. > (Remembering GNC L-Tryptophen disaster from years back) > > 8. A good work environment, fair pay, benefits and background > checks to > reduce likelihood of product tampering, employee theft, extreme > addiction > problems, etc... again to protect image/reputation and liability > costs. > > 9. A five year business plan which will allow you plan for growth, > obtain > credit for expansion, and allow you to value your business for > insurance > purposes or potential sale. > > 10. A R&D group to devise vitamin combinations to reduce the number > of pills > people need to take each morning for specific consumer problems and/or > gender/age groups. This also serves to differentiate your line > vitamins > from those of your competition. > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan > Despres > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:23 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [extropy-chat] A successful company? > > Hi, > > I want to know what we need to become a successful company (I am in > the > vitamin business), here is my opinion: > > 1) We need to buy our products very cheaply and sell high (This is > a trade > minimum to do) > > 2) We need talented people to do the essential job > > 3) We need a good image/reputation > > 4) We need a good product. > > Any other thing I miss ? > > --Jon > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > -- > LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc. > Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. > Mission: To Preserve, Protect and Enhance Lifespan > Plant-based Natural-health Bio-product Bio-pharmaceuticals > http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan > http://www.4XtraLifespans.bravehost.com > megao at sasktel.net, arla_j at hotmail.com, mfj.eav at gmail.com > extropian.pharmer at gmail.com > > Extreme Life-Extension ..."The most dangerous idea on earth" > -Leon Kass , Bioethics Advisor to George Herbert Walker Bush, > June 2005 > > Radical Life-Extension Bioscience > + Total Information Awareness Globalized Info-science > = The 21st Century Paradigm ........ > Re-inventing the Human Condition with Quantum to Macro > Biomolecular-engineering > *"I will live each and every 50 years, one at a time, like the > days of a week".... Morris Johnson - June 2005* > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 20 12:59:18 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:59:18 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:07:30 -0500, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Does it matter if there is a consensus or not? Obviously it matters to me, or I would not have asked the question. I have a high regard for extropian opinion. -gts > - s > On Nov 18, 2005, at 10:57 PM, gts wrote: > >> Truth is, I opened this thread to test the waters and find out it if my >> old extropian friends are as opposed to the ID movement as I am. I've >> been away from this discussion list for a couple of years. >> >> Is there a consensus here on this subject? >> >> -gts >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Nov 20 14:19:21 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 09:19:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003101c5eddd$6c626430$74550318@ZANDRA2> Walmart opens many of their new stores in rural areas that have no other large department stores or malls within short driving distances. This was one of the keys to their success. In doing so they are usually the first to displace the small mom and pop type businesses. This created I'd say 40% of the negativity. When I briefly worked at Walmart opening a new store I was at first impressed with the training and logistics. As a new store we were free to work as much overtime as we could handle. At 7.00/hr and time and a half for overtime you could pay the bills. Not going to get rich but enough to survive. After they were open a few months though management came through and told everyone they were cutting out overtime and by the way all the work that we did in 60 hrs still needed to be done in 40 hours. Being the night shift, we had to receive all the trucks and have all the shelves restocked by morning. The intention was to let people know if you didn't want to be fired. You were to puch out and then stay and work until all your work was done. The people who didn't get the work done were written up and put on probation even though management knew that the only people doing in 40 what used to take 60 hours were people willing to work a lot of unpaid hours. Rather than play their game. I simply told them that there was know way possible for a person to work that fast safely and that I was not going to hurt myself or someone else for $7.00 hr and resigned. Thinking back I probably should have filed a complaint with OSHA and then requested whistle blower status. But at that time survival was more on my mind than playing the activist. When I shop at Walmart's at night now. (I know I shoudn't shop there!) I see some of the same people I worked with. They all look a little more tired and old than they did when I was there. When they see me they all stop and ask me where I'm working and sound ashamed that they haven't found better jobs yet. Oh and by the way if you talk to people who work for Target a lot of them graduated from Walmart and I don't think you would find one of them willing to consider going back! Not that the pay is that much better at Target. I just believe that the pressure and mind games that the managers are taught to play at Walmart does not exist at Target. >> Yeah, isn't it interesting that the commies don't go Target-bashing? It may have something to do with the slightly more upscale image of Target, and the feeling that Wal-Mart is more for rural rednecks. Urban upper- and mid-middle class commies despise rednecks. From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 20 14:29:11 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 09:29:11 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> "Rik van Riel" > companies paid employees not in money but > in coupons, which could only be spent at (overpriced) company > stores. This practice has luckily been outlawed in most of > the world by now. I have read some reports that sweatshops operated by > certain companies, mostly in China, are reinstating a similar policy. > Their "employees" are obliged to live in overcrowded company > "housing" for which they are charged rent, and are overcharged > for their food. Read my lips, I DON'T CARE! Whatever economic policies companies are following in China it is my sincerest desire that they do more of it, the reason is it's working. We are seeing in China today largest explosion of wealth and the fastest increase in living standards by the largest number of people this little planet has even observed. Because of this China is also politically calmer and less radical now than its been in several centuries, and that's not a bad thing either, 1.4 billion people fighting among themselves would not be fun. So in short, if it's not broken then don't fix it. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 20 15:13:57 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:13:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <010a01c5ede5$1a22d030$90064e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson" Bayer for instance. As well as inventing Aspirin, they also > trademarked Heroin and sold it in several European countries Heroin was developed because it was though that it was less addictive than cocaine, it turned out that Bayer was wrong about that. Apparently drug development 100 years ago was not was not quite as good as it is today, what a surprise! Nevertheless Heroine is still a very useful drug, it is often the only thing that works for chronic pain, or it would be if the God Damn Fucking government didn't stop these poor people from using it. The government's own Department of Health and Human Services says 2/3 of terminal cancer patients do not receive adequate pain medication because their doctors are afraid of getting into trouble with God Damn Fucking Big Brother. > Bayer avidly supported Hitler Some companies did support Hitler, most did not at least during his early rise to power. And I agree that no company played the hero and avidly opposed Hitler, doing so would have been economic if not actual suicide, but by no stretch of the imagination could you say business was the reason Hitler came to power, his ability to put street mobs into a frenzy of hate was. John K Clark From riel at surriel.com Sun Nov 20 15:53:48 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:53:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > Read my lips, I DON'T CARE! Whatever economic policies companies are > following in China it is my sincerest desire that they do more of it, the > reason is it's working. > 1.4 billion people fighting among themselves would not be fun. So in > short, if it's not broken then don't fix it. Learn from the past. If the wealth gap is allowed to grow too large, bad things will happen. Riots are the least problem to worry about. More worrysome would be organized crime rising to levels so intense that it hinders economic growth by discouraging foreign investments. Even worse would be if the government caved in to popular pressure and changed the market economy to something more regulated. China may not be a democracy, but no government will stand up to a billion disgruntled people... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Sun Nov 20 15:55:10 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:55:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### Yeah, isn't it interesting that the commies don't go > Target-bashing? It may have something to do with the slightly more > upscale image of Target, and the feeling that Wal-Mart is more for > rural rednecks. Urban upper- and mid-middle class commies despise > rednecks. You're giving Walmart shareholders everywhere a bad name ;) -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From riel at surriel.com Sun Nov 20 17:37:56 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:37:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> References: <200511081900.jA8J0Be04712@tick.javien.com><006901c5e50f$11892d40$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001c01c5e5eb$c7380620$0201a8c0@JPAcer><001201c5e61e$e8be4c40$fd084e0c@MyComputer><1131679960.12021.501.camel@localhost.localdomain> <002b01c5e6ef$0d5195f0$540a4e0c@MyComputer> <4375477E.1090604@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Joseph Bloch wrote: > I've always wondered about those statistics, which say that people in > under-developed countries make $x an hour. Do those figures take into > account the buying power of a dollar in that country? > > As in, if a gallon of cooking oil costs $2 in the United States, and > $0.02 in Mozambique, ... then somebody would buy up all the cooking oil in Mozambique, ship it off to the USA and sell it here. Huge buying power differential is mostly ficticious in a global economy. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 20 18:55:36 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:55:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002d01c5ee03$fed4d200$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" ### Yeah, isn't it interesting that the commies don't go Target-bashing? It may have something to do with the slightly more upscale image of Target, and the feeling that Wal-Mart is more for rural rednecks. Urban upper- and mid-middle class commies despise rednecks. Good grief. What do we have here? ...Why, a gentleman and a scholar. Olga From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 20 19:05:55 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 11:05:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) References: <003101c5eddd$6c626430$74550318@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <004201c5ee05$6fbafde0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Gary Miller" > Walmart opens many of their new stores in rural areas that have no other > large department stores or malls within short driving distances. This was > one of the keys to their success. In doing so they are usually the first > to displace the small mom and pop type businesses. This created I'd say > 40% of the negativity. Yes, and often the former employees of those mom-and-pops were the ones who reluctantly went to work for Wal-Mart - Wal-Mart was virtually the only employer in town. > ... After they were open a few months though management came through and > told everyone they were cutting out overtime and by the way all the work > that we did in 60 hrs still needed to be done in 40 hours. Being the > night shift, we had to receive all the trucks and have all the shelves > restocked by morning. > The intention was to let people know if you didn't want to be fired. You > were to punch out and then stay and work until all your work was done. Yes, one of the suits against Wal-Mart was over this practice. (That's is how Wal-Mart got around having to pay minimum wages - employees worked another shift part-time off the clock ... i.e., for free!): http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/wal-mart/not_paid.htm Olga From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 20 21:08:05 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:08:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> "Rik van Riel" > If the wealth gap is allowed to grow too large, bad things > will happen. When China promoted the same sort of economic principles you and Jack advocate the wealth gap was indeed quite small, all 1.4 billion people were the same, all were dirt poor. After China really started embracing capitalistic principles 800 million are still poor, but 600 million are not. 600 million! Not bad for just 15 years work. And you can do better? > Learn from the past. [.] Riots are the least problem to worry about. Yea, let's go back to the good old day where tens of millions of people died from starvation in a single year like they did under Mao, that's the prescription for world peace. > organized crime rising to levels so intense that it hinders economic > growth If we follow your advice and that of Jack's organized crime won't be able to hinder economic growth because there would be no economic growth to hinder. By the way, I'm much more worried about unorganized crime than organized. I would guess that 75% (or more) of organized crime's profits come from providing goods and services that are banned but shouldn't be, like drugs, prostitution, gambling, and money laundering. John K Clark From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 20 22:19:24 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:19:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <004b01c5ee20$7704e1e0$8a893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 4:08 PM John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote: >> organized crime rising to levels so intense >> that it hinders economic growth > [snip] > > By the way, I'm much more worried about > unorganized crime than organized. I would > guess that 75% (or more) of organized > crime's profits come from providing goods > and services that are banned but shouldn't > be, like drugs, prostitution, gambling, and > money laundering. While it's true that what people typically call "organized crime" arises from government interferences in society, it's also true that government itself is a form of organized crime. Observe that governments do things that, were they done by ordinary people, would be considered criminal, such as tax, conscript, jail, and kill people. If you were to tax people, it would be dubbed theft. If you were to conscript people, it would be called slavery. Jailing, done by you without the imprimatur of the government, would be called kidnapping. And while governments routinely kill people in war and peace, were you do either, in a similar fashion, you'd be labeled a murderer. On this note, too, governments, and not other organized criminals and even organized ones, have killed more people in the last century during peacetime than probably all the non-government murderers killed during the entire history of humanity. That scares me. It scares me a lot. It also scares me that some people not only want governments to have ever more power -- in an age when they already minutely control life (think of the host of regulations, prohibitions, etc. involved in any activity and transaction today that a few decades ago would've hardly been imagined much less tolerated save for by totalitarians and their minions) -- and are worried about side issues like petty crime or that someone somewhere might have one grain of rice more than the next guy. Now, I know some here are dedicated to increasing the length of human life -- even out to infinity. Wouldn't a good place to start be with at least recognizing the biggest institutionalized killers of humans? Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ "History is a selective recreation of the events of the past, according to a historian's premises regarding what is important and his judgment concerning the nature of causality in human action. This selectivity is a most important aspect of history, and it is this alone which prevents history from becoming a random chronicling of events. And since this selectivity is necessary to history, the only remaining question is whether or not such judgments will be made explicitly or implicitly, with full knowledge of what one considers to be important and why, or without such awareness. Selection presupposes a means, method, or principle of selection. The historian's view of the nature of causality in human action also is determined by a principle of selection." -- Roy Childs From HerbM at learnquick.com Sun Nov 20 22:20:40 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:20:40 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 02:03:22PM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > > But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the > > Simulation Argument. > > Not this transhumanist. > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > SA in a strong sense? I.e., would you be willing to bet your life > on it? > Perhaps. Intuitively it seems a terrible bet, but with consideration of the evidence logically it isn't quite so obvious. (Kurzweil makes this argument in "The Singularity is Near" and it is logically compelling while remaining emotionally unsatisfying.) The statistical argument is strong but not airtight. If I MUST be my life on anything then I am going to go with the logical and scientific odds in so far as I can know them, but.... The terms AND context of the bet would have to be stated explicitly, and very carefully, to make rational decision possible, e.g.: Would everyone who was WRONG about SA be destroyed too? (Thus requiring one to choose between two-plus, VERY explicit, choices, not just "SA" in general, unless that is the wording chosen by this hypothetical executioner....but such deserves to be made unambiguous and removed from the area of assumptions and the normal "common sense", that of course "everyone knows.") Referencing earlier in the thread (I have been traveling)... Also, with ID, in THEORY there is no claim to a supernatural mythological god of any particular religion -- that such a position is disingenuous at best, was the reason for my mentioning that ID enthusiasts in the traditional anti-Evolutionary sense, would be upset to find that a scientific explanation of origins using Intelligent Design would have to mention the Simulation Argument, and would likely conclude SA was the MOST LIKELY scenario were ID to be correct. This would greatly upset most everyone who associates their religious position with ID. -- Herb Martin From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 22:22:20 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:22:20 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 11/20/05, John K Clark wrote: > > By the way, I'm much more worried about unorganized crime than organized. I > would guess that 75% (or more) of organized crime's profits come from > providing goods and services that are banned but shouldn't be, like drugs, > prostitution, gambling, and money laundering. > That's a great slogan, John! Now that you've got the Extropians list advocating drugs, prostitution, gambling, and money laundering, what else can we do to become *really* popular? Cannibalism of poor people? Fits in with your outlook on life. Perhaps you should take over the Extropians PR function? BillK From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 20 22:46:56 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 14:46:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> ... providing goods and services that are banned but shouldn't be, like drugs, prostitution, gambling, and money laundering... How did money laundering get on the list? I can see some recreational drugs, such as marijuana, certainly gambling and harlotry, but money laundering? That's still bad. spike From riel at surriel.com Sun Nov 20 22:55:55 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:55:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > If we follow your advice and that of Jack's organized crime won't be > able to hinder economic growth because there would be no economic growth > to hinder. My advice doesn't go any further than: - pay minimum wage - comply with labor laws I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 22:56:09 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:56:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511201456t7d60eb7el96b67a286fe192b7@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, BillK wrote: > > That's a great slogan, John! > Now that you've got the Extropians list advocating drugs, > prostitution, gambling, and money laundering, what else can we do to > become *really* popular? ### So you think advocating drugs, sex, wild casino parties, and being able to keep all the money you make there without taxes, could make extropians unpopular? :) I beg to differ. Rafal From outlawpoet at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 22:59:18 2005 From: outlawpoet at gmail.com (justin corwin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 14:59:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> References: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <3ad827f30511201459x24a86c58sb74e6bb0c4fee198@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, spike wrote: > How did money laundering get on the list? I can > see some recreational drugs, such as marijuana, > certainly gambling and harlotry, but money > laundering? That's still bad. I was under the impression that money laundering was concealing or reprocessing money FROM illegal activities by definition. I thought that Mr. Clark was saying that the majority of profits made in money laundering from activities that shouldn't have been illegal in the first place. Or perhaps that the laws passed to try to prevent people from laundering their money violated privacy and property rights, and those controls should be lifted. (like child porn being illegal, when it's _child abuse_ we're interested in stopping). Or maybe I just missed it entirely. -- Justin Corwin outlawpoet at hell.com http://outlawpoet.blogspot.com http://www.adaptiveai.com From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 23:03:04 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:03:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <002d01c5ee03$fed4d200$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> <002d01c5ee03$fed4d200$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511201503q1d5c8f3cj4d4beba9a53bb50b@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" > > ### Yeah, isn't it interesting that the commies don't go Target-bashing? It > may have something to do with the slightly more upscale image of Target, and > the feeling that Wal-Mart is more for rural rednecks. Urban upper- and > mid-middle class commies despise rednecks. > Olga commented: > Good grief. What do we have here? > > ...Why, a gentleman and a scholar. > ### A scholar, yes, but hardly a gentleman. I am a redneck in good standing, my house is two miles away from the nearest neighbor, I shoot my pistols in the backyard, and occasionally pee from the porch in broad daylight. Long live Wal-Mart! Down with urban commies! Yeehaa! Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Nov 20 23:04:42 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:04:42 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > > > If we follow your advice and that of Jack's organized crime won't be > > able to hinder economic growth because there would be no economic growth > > to hinder. > > My advice doesn't go any further than: > - pay minimum wage > - comply with labor laws > > I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. ### Minimum wages and labor laws. Illegitimate and destructive. Rafal From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 20 23:06:07 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:06:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <04cf01c5ee26$fde8fd80$8a893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 5:46 PM spike spike66 at comcast.net wrote: > How did money laundering get on the > list? I can see some recreational drugs, > such as marijuana, certainly gambling > and harlotry, but money laundering? > That's still bad. Why? Isn't money laundering about people trying to hide money they might have actually earned -- however, earned in activities that government doesn't approve of -- and, in itself, there's nothing wrong with? Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ "History is a selective recreation of the events of the past, according to a historian's premises regarding what is important and his judgment concerning the nature of causality in human action. This selectivity is a most important aspect of history, and it is this alone which prevents history from becoming a random chronicling of events. And since this selectivity is necessary to history, the only remaining question is whether or not such judgments will be made explicitly or implicitly, with full knowledge of what one considers to be important and why, or without such awareness. Selection presupposes a means, method, or principle of selection. The historian's view of the nature of causality in human action also is determined by a principle of selection." -- Roy Childs From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 20 23:21:09 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:21:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 5:55 PM Rik van Riel riel at surriel.com wrote: >> If we follow your advice and that of Jack's >> organized crime won't be able to hinder >> economic growth because there would be >> no economic growth to hinder. > > My advice doesn't go any further than: > - pay minimum wage > - comply with labor laws > > I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. Easy: both put people out of work by otherwise preventing people from coming to mutual agreements on, respectively, wages and working conditions. (In other words, it reduces personal freedom, specifically freedom to trade and freedom to contract.) Why do you think Wal-Mart is in favor of raising the minimum wage? Out of altruism or because it will help to put a lot of its local competitors out of business? Why are unions for all kinds of mandatory, government enforced work rules? Because they also are altruists or because they want to reduce the number of positions available in any field to keep wages above a market level? Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 20 23:42:19 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:42:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" > On 11/20/05, Rik van Riel wrote: >> My advice doesn't go any further than: >> - pay minimum wage >> - comply with labor laws >> >> I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. > > ### Minimum wages and labor laws. Illegitimate and destructive. Yeah, Rafal, why not go back to the days of the free lunch, as in "let them eat cake"? And to celebrate the end of labor laws, let's take a nostalgic walk down memory lane: http://www.csun.edu/~ghy7463/mw2.html And to celebrate the end of minimum wage laws, why not do something completely different (and retro-radical) and bring back the idea of working simply for the *privilege* of working? With such work incentives and privileges, I ask you, what patriot would even **want** to work for wages?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery Olga From brentn at freeshell.org Sun Nov 20 23:54:35 2005 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:54:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511201503q1d5c8f3cj4d4beba9a53bb50b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: (11/20/05 18:03) Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >### A scholar, yes, but hardly a gentleman. I am a redneck in good >standing, my house is two miles away from the nearest neighbor, I >shoot my pistols in the backyard, and occasionally pee from the porch >in broad daylight. > >Long live Wal-Mart! > >Down with urban commies! > >Yeehaa! > >Rafal You know, in the part of the South that I'm from, being a redneck ain't something to be proud of. It typically means that yo' momma din't raise you right. You might kick dawgs, beat yer woman and never work an honest living. Good ol' boys rightly despise being called rednecks, and with good reason. ;) B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 21 00:09:24 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:09:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511201459x24a86c58sb74e6bb0c4fee198@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com> > I was under the impression that money laundering was concealing or > reprocessing money FROM illegal activities by definition. Ja perhaps he did mean that, but money laundering can also mean taking stolen loot and making it look like it came from a legitimate source. If the victimless or willing-and-eager-victim vice stuff is made legal, then it isn't necessary to launder the profits. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of justin corwin > Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:59 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality > > On 11/20/05, spike wrote: > > How did money laundering get on the list? I can > > see some recreational drugs, such as marijuana, > > certainly gambling and harlotry, but money > > laundering? That's still bad. From dmasten at piratelabs.org Mon Nov 21 00:44:09 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:44:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <1132533849.4293.19.camel@dmlap> On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 15:42 -0800, Olga Bourlin wrote: > And to celebrate the end of minimum wage laws, why not do something > completely different (and retro-radical) and bring back the idea of working > simply for the *privilege* of working? With such work incentives and > privileges, I ask you, what patriot would even **want** to work for wages?: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery Olga, Would you please do me the favor of explaining to me how restricting two parties from certain exchanges is related to coercing another to do labor? Thanks, Dave From sentience at pobox.com Mon Nov 21 00:48:32 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:48:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <43811960.2030304@pobox.com> Technotranscendence wrote: > Why are unions for all kinds of mandatory, government enforced work > rules? Because they also are altruists or because they want to reduce > the number of positions available in any field to keep wages above a > market level? That doesn't make any sense to me. To keep wages above market level, you keep the number of positions artificially high and the number of candidate workers artificially low. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Nov 21 01:53:27 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:53:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com><004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <1132533849.4293.19.camel@dmlap> Message-ID: <001301c5ee3e$5e60c370$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "David Masten" > On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 15:42 -0800, Olga Bourlin wrote: >> And to celebrate the end of minimum wage laws, why not do something >> completely different (and retro-radical) and bring back the idea of >> working simply for the *privilege* of working? With such work incentives >> and privileges, I ask you, what patriot would even **want** to work for >> wages?: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery > Would you please do me the favor of explaining to me how restricting two > parties from certain exchanges is related to coercing another to do labor? 1) I was being facetious (somewhat); 2) In an ideal society where just about everyone is ethical, and kindhearted and fair - I would go as far as entertaining that such an exchange could take place; but 3) When in history has this ever taken place? Olga From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 21 02:30:17 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 21:30:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> <43811960.2030304@pobox.com> Message-ID: <002b01c5ee43$83cb85a0$0b893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 7:48 PM Eliezer S. Yudkowsky sentience at pobox.com wrote: >> Why are unions for all kinds of mandatory, government >> enforced work rules? Because they also are altruists >> or because they want to reduce the number of positions >> available in any field to keep wages above a market >> level? > > That doesn't make any sense to me. To keep wages > above market level, you keep the number of positions > artificially high and the number of candidate workers > artificially low. My mistake. Keep the supply artificically low while demand remains the same. Regards, Dan From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 21 02:34:09 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:34:09 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! I'm not ready for reality! (was the 7 cents thread) References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com> <002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com> <006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <4CDF6226-6492-4929-96B7-50DE38C8FE3A@mac.com> <001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <13776929-0320-4809-9D81-6AA40C0600C7@mac.com> Message-ID: <001901c5ee44$0eb2c1b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha Atkins" > On Nov 19, 2005, at 2:42 AM, Jack Parkinson wrote: >>(snop) >> 1) That arriving at the pinnacle of success (for a person) - or market >> power (for an organisation) does not make either the person, or the >> organisation, admirable. "Winners" are not to be adored as Darwinian >> success stories (especially if their 'wins' are only able to be >> appreciated in economic terms). Conservative capitalism's love of the >> big players is (I think) a form of false idolatry. > > It takes many quite admirable qualities to "arrive at the pinnacle of > success". Darwin has very little to do with it and in context you > display prejudice to interject Darwin here. Bigness per se also has > little to do with success. You comment is beside the point. I didn't raise Darwin - and I certainly don't believe this nonsense! John C did raise it in a prior post, and I thought it was ridiculous. Since I am arguing that small is good, I am hardly likely to make the claim you attribute to me above - which I understand as big equates with success.. > >> Extrapolated to the extropian point of view - this means in my opinion >> that there is still plenty of scope for everything to go terribly wrong. >> If big business can be immoral, self-serving and parasitic - and >> presidents can be dumb and parochial - who knows what might happen? > Business cannot be truly amoral without going out of business unless > propped up by government, i.e., by physical force. I do not agree that > business, big or otherwise, is generally parasitic. Business is by > definition "self-serving" but if done rationally that is not only not a > breach of morality in my thinking, it is essential to morality. The pressure on business is always towards amorality. This is because it is cheaper to pay people less, cut safety margins, fail to deal with your effluents, take short cuts, dilute the mix, etc. Any controlling ethical/moral/legal system constitutes an overhead that inflates costs. I did not say however that all business is parasitic - and I do not believe that. > >> The question: Who will control the technology - and how will they do it? >> May well be the ultimate deciding factor between a bright enhanced >> future and interminable conflict or worse. I for one would not like a >> mega-corporation to exercise this kind of control. >> > > I doubt very much that any centralized group will or can "control the > technology". I don't consider the question particularly relevant. I do doubt. And I think the question is very relevant. How will you feel if life extension and perpetual youth/good health becomes possible, but the requisite /medical application/gene sequences/techniques have been patented by a corporation - who refuse to let you join the elite they have decided will use them? > >> 2) There is too much facile acceptance of silly buzz-word ideas like: >> "Efficiency is keeping prices low," > > Do you deny that the price is directly correlated with efficiency of > production and distribution? Silly question. Buzz phrases by definition have some truth - the whole point I am making is that that it is not ALL the truth. > >> "Darwin asserts that the survivor is the best equipped to carry the >> torch," > > Darwin asserted no such thing when applied to general business. I KNOW! I gave this as an example of stupidity! Some such nonsense came from John C! > >> What's good for the economy is good for the country," > > This is true but most people are very confused about what is actually > good ofr the economy or as to what they mean by "economy". You completely failed to understand that I gave all these expressions as examples of facile reasoning. > >> "All competition is healthy" etc. As above... > > All competition under rules that outlaw the initiation of force is > generally healthy in economic and many other activities. Yes! But ...very large business can squash effective competition and use force... > >> There is no credit to be had for taking a 10 second sound-bite to be all >> inclusive wisdom. > > There is no credit in denigrating others with a straw man argument. Samantha, you have not properly read and understood this thread... > >> Catch-phrases are for air-heads and couch potatoes - serious people >> should be prepared to look at the in-depth argument or admit that Homer >> Simpson does it way better than they do. > > OK. I agree with Rafal and others here. What you are doing is not > reasoned argument. Later. > - samantha You may have thought it more reasonable had your comprehension of what I said not been skewed about 180 degrees... Jack Parkinson From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 21 02:47:52 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 21:47:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <003a01c5ee45$f84d5960$0b893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:42 PM Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com wrote: >> ### Minimum wages and labor laws. Illegitimate >> and destructive. > > Yeah, Rafal, why not go back to the days of the free > lunch, as in "let them eat cake"? Where did you get that from? > And to celebrate the end of labor laws, let's take a > nostalgic walk down memory lane: > http://www.csun.edu/~ghy7463/mw2.html This can all be handled by people voluntarily contracting for such working conditions and also suing employers who provide conditions that are unreasonably dangerous. > And to celebrate the end of minimum wage laws, > why not do something completely different (and > retro-radical) and bring back the idea of working > simply for the *privilege* of working? With such > work incentives and privileges, I ask you, what > patriot would even **want** to work for wages?: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery Huh? This has nothing to do with patriotism. Were people in the US before the advent of minimum wage laws all slaves? The point is people can negotiate for whatever wages they can get from an employer and not have a third party -- the government -- dictate what the outcome of those negotiations are. In essence, slavery is what? Forcing people to do what they don't want to do, right? If you agree with that, then if someone wants to work for less than the government imposed minimum wage or wants to work under rules different than the government mandates, then why is that anyone else's business? Forcing her or him to do otherwise is, in essence, almost like slavery because you're limiting her or his choices. Now you might not like the particular choices a person has or makes, but that's no reason to limit that person's choices from the start. And the end result of minimum wage laws has been unemployment. Yes, in the short run, there might be a boost in wages, but employers will soon start cutting staff. There's really no way to escape the law of supply and demand -- not by wishful thinking or by government edict. Put another way, a minimum wage law does not raise the price of labor as such. It merely puts some laborers off the market -- anyone who labor is not worth as much as the minimum wage. (This has the side effect of protecting other laborers from competition, which is why unions like minimum wage laws.) Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Nov 21 03:44:23 2005 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 19:44:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com><004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <003a01c5ee45$f84d5960$0b893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <000801c5ee4d$dd608570$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Technotranscendence" >> And to celebrate the end of minimum wage laws, >> why not do something completely different (and >> retro-radical) and bring back the idea of working >> simply for the *privilege* of working? With such >> work incentives and privileges, I ask you, what >> patriot would even **want** to work for wages?: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery > > Huh? This has nothing to do with patriotism. Were people in the US > before the advent of minimum wage laws all slaves? I was being F-A-C-E-T-I-O-U-S. Olga > The point is people can negotiate for whatever wages they can get from > an employer and not have a third party -- the government -- dictate what > the outcome of those negotiations are. In essence, slavery is what? > Forcing people to do what they don't want to do, right? If you agree > with that, then if someone wants to work for less than the government > imposed minimum wage or wants to work under rules different than the > government mandates, then why is that anyone else's business? Forcing > her or him to do otherwise is, in essence, almost like slavery because > you're limiting her or his choices. Now you might not like the > particular choices a person has or makes, but that's no reason to limit > that person's choices from the start. > > And the end result of minimum wage laws has been unemployment. Yes, in > the short run, there might be a boost in wages, but employers will soon > start cutting staff. There's really no way to escape the law of supply > and demand -- not by wishful thinking or by government edict. Put > another way, a minimum wage law does not raise the price of labor as > such. It merely puts some laborers off the market -- anyone who labor > is not worth as much as the minimum wage. (This has the side effect of > protecting other laborers from competition, which is why unions like > minimum wage laws.) > > Regards, > > Dan > http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 21 03:55:16 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:55:16 -0500 Subject: Minimum wages laws/was Re: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com><004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac><1132533849.4293.19.camel@dmlap> <001301c5ee3e$5e60c370$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <005301c5ee4f$62e79b60$0b893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:53 PM Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com wrote: >> Would you please do me the favor of explaining >> to me how restricting two parties from certain >> exchanges is related to coercing another to do >> labor? > > 1) I was being facetious (somewhat); > 2) In an ideal society where just about everyone is > ethical, and kindhearted and fair - I would go as far > as entertaining that such an exchange could > take place; but This is almost like saying, "People aren't ready to make choices. I know better than them. They should accept my dictates on these issues." :) It's also like saying, "In an ideal society where just about everyone is ethical, and kindhearted and fair - I would go as far as entertaining that freedom of speech could take place, but..." OR "In an ideal society where just about everyone is ethical, and kindhearted and fair - I would go as far as entertaining that freedom to choose romantic partners could take place, but..." OR "In an ideal society where just about everyone is ethical, and kindhearted and fair - I would go as far as entertaining that freedom to choose a career could take place, but..." In truth, people become more ethical, kindhearted, and fair when they are free to make choices. When you force them to do things, they never have a chance to become better. Also, in a free society, people who are unethical, mean, and unfair will, in general, do worse. Why? Well, as employees, their employees won't like them because they'll chase away customers and investors. As employees, people, in general, don't want to work where they feel they're being treated unethically, cruelly, or unfairly. Now, granted, there are other incentives operating. For instance, an employer might not fire the unethical, mean, unfair employee because she or he has a better skill set or because she or he accepts a lower wage. However, other things being equal, these are bad qualities and not marketable ones. The same applies to employees. An employee might accept worse working conditions because the pay is higher or there's on the job training and other benefits. But all other things being equal, without these added benefits people will leave bad firms for better ones. (And this is actually what we see all across the globe.) > 3) When in history has this ever taken place? Almost everywhere where government has not interfered with the process. Hong Kong was a great example of this in action. No minimum wage law to speak of, yet no poor to speak of and workers generally expected wage increases as their experience and skill set improved. (The tradition was that workers would actually peruse the want ads during lunch. If they found something better, they asked for raise or left.) If you were right, then we should have expected Hong Kong to be an economic basket case. Instead, it was so successful that Britain and the US feared economic competition from it. Why is that? Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 21 04:00:24 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:00:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Technotranscendence wrote: > On Sunday, November 20, 2005 5:55 PM Rik van Riel riel at surriel.com > > My advice doesn't go any further than: > > - pay minimum wage > > - comply with labor laws > > > > I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. > > Easy: both put people out of work by otherwise preventing people from > coming to mutual agreements on, respectively, wages and working > conditions. (In other words, it reduces personal freedom, specifically > freedom to trade and freedom to contract.) If you seriously think people should work for less than their own cost of living, you might want to put your money where your mouth is and live on a salary below minimum wage yourself. If you think that is not acceptable, you should not be wishing it on others. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 04:36:04 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:36:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Minimum wages laws In-Reply-To: <005301c5ee4f$62e79b60$0b893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> In some ways I think a below poverty level minimum wage is worse than slavery. During slavery, a slave was coerced to perform labor for someone on threat of physical punishment or death. But a slave was also considered to be a valuable commodity. They were expensive to buy so many slaveowners did not want to damage a slave to the point where he could no longer work. Also a slave was given room and board such that his ability to continue to work was preserved. Thus almost no slaves were allowed to starve to death because this would be an inappropriate management of a slave owner's assets. In this regard, all slaves lived above the poverty line in the sense that their basic needs were essentially guaranteed by their owners. In comparison, a sub-poverty level worker is also compelled to perform labor, but not for any one specific entity. Instead he is forced to work for anybody willing to pay him what meager wages he can get. He does not need to fear punishment but is instead coerced by threat of starvation and death. His employer is not responsible for his well being and thus there is no assurance of his basic needs for food, clothing, or shelter being met. Indeed, the sub-poverty worker seems to be worse-off than the slave whilest the sweat-shop owner is better off than slave owner because he does not need to invest the overhead in buying the slave in the first place. Can somebody show me how this argument is flawed? Is sweat-shop labor not cheaper for the businesses that employ it than slaves were for slave owners? Is not a slave that gets fed, clothed, and housed not better off than an employee who can't afford these things on the wgaes he is paid? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 06:00:22 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:00:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <5700855F-BFCF-483F-907C-01355E2744D1@mac.com> On Nov 20, 2005, at 2:22 PM, BillK wrote: > On 11/20/05, John K Clark wrote: > >> >> By the way, I'm much more worried about unorganized crime than >> organized. I >> would guess that 75% (or more) of organized crime's profits come from >> providing goods and services that are banned but shouldn't be, >> like drugs, >> prostitution, gambling, and money laundering. >> >> > > > That's a great slogan, John! > Now that you've got the Extropians list advocating drugs, > prostitution, gambling, and money laundering, what else can we do to > become *really* popular? Who the hell speaks for the entire list? By the way, I agree that none of the above should be crimes. But I don't anymore speak for extropians as a group than you do. Thank Newton. So stop trying to stifle speech and say something that will make us look great if you are so concerned. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 06:02:43 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:02:43 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> References: <200511202247.jAKMlWe01341@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <66A37CDA-9D49-4A39-ADD8-7D98E909F6DF@mac.com> Really? If a lot of things that make money were legal then there wouldn't be su much much money to somehow launder into legit circulation. - s On Nov 20, 2005, at 2:46 PM, spike wrote: > ... providing goods and services that are banned but shouldn't be, > like > drugs, prostitution, gambling, and money laundering... > > > > How did money laundering get on the list? I can > see some recreational drugs, such as marijuana, > certainly gambling and harlotry, but money > laundering? That's still bad. > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 06:04:55 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:04:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511201503q1d5c8f3cj4d4beba9a53bb50b@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> <002d01c5ee03$fed4d200$6600a8c0@brainiac> <7641ddc60511201503q1d5c8f3cj4d4beba9a53bb50b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 20, 2005, at 3:03 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> > Olga commented: > > >> Good grief. What do we have here? >> >> ...Why, a gentleman and a scholar. >> >> > > ### A scholar, yes, but hardly a gentleman. I am a redneck in good > standing, my house is two miles away from the nearest neighbor, I > shoot my pistols in the backyard, and occasionally pee from the porch > in broad daylight. Remind me never to approach your house down wind of the porch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 06:06:12 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:06:12 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com> <001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <0EA43341-6F6D-4F69-9C25-017DAE043700@mac.com> On Nov 20, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Rafal Smigrodzki" > >> On 11/20/05, Rik van Riel wrote: >> >>> My advice doesn't go any further than: >>> - pay minimum wage >>> - comply with labor laws >>> >>> I'd like to know what you think is bad about that. >>> >> >> ### Minimum wages and labor laws. Illegitimate and destructive. >> > > Yeah, Rafal, why not go back to the days of the free lunch, as in > "let them eat cake"? > Let them eat nano-cake! - s From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 06:07:35 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:07:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com> References: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <3A3306B6-69D4-401B-8D23-FE7F90F1D6AF@mac.com> On Nov 20, 2005, at 4:09 PM, spike wrote: >> I was under the impression that money laundering was concealing or >> reprocessing money FROM illegal activities by definition. >> > > Ja perhaps he did mean that, but money laundering > can also mean taking stolen loot and making it > look like it came from a legitimate source. That's "fencing". Different beast. From dmasten at piratelabs.org Mon Nov 21 06:34:49 2005 From: dmasten at piratelabs.org (David Masten) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:34:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Minimum wages laws In-Reply-To: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1132554889.4293.49.camel@dmlap> On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 20:36 -0800, The Avantguardian wrote: > In comparison, a sub-poverty level worker is also > compelled to perform labor, but not for any one > specific entity. Instead he is forced to work for > anybody willing to pay him what meager wages he can > get. Which in every case is better than the alternatives - in most countries this would be prostitution, begging, or subsistence farming. > He does not need to fear punishment but is > instead coerced by threat of starvation and death. His > employer is not responsible for his well being and > thus there is no assurance of his basic needs for > food, clothing, or shelter being met. Indeed, the > sub-poverty worker seems to be worse-off than the > slave whilest the sweat-shop owner is better off than > slave owner because he does not need to invest the > overhead in buying the slave in the first place. Data for modern slavery is rather difficult to obtain, but anecdotal evidence suggests that they are worse off than sweatshop workers. Also, there is a good economic reason for an employer making sure employees get at least a certain level of food and shelter - the cost of hiring and training laborers. > Can somebody show me how this argument is flawed? Is > sweat-shop labor not cheaper for the businesses that > employ it than slaves were for slave owners? Wage labor is generally cheaper, but that has more to do with the relationship between laborer and manager. Modern industrial labor generally requires the willing participation of the laborer. The number of overseers required for slave labor in modern industrial settings is too high to make slave labor cost effective. At any rate, you seem to be making the erroneous assumption that sweatshop laborers are in terrible shape. http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0802/p09s02-coop.html or the longer version: http://www.independent.org/pdf/working_papers/53_sweatshop.pdf Dave From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 06:47:54 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:47:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com><000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer><7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60511161452u646d9afeie331554fd0fd5437@mail.gmail.com><014701c5eb9a$ec8865a0$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer><22360fa10511171255i2d02c5a6gca46b146f36f3c45@mail.gmail.com><437CF1DE.40604@pobox.com><001e01c5ec62$71290130$e2064e0c@MyComputer><437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com><012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer><002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer><001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer><088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <004201c5ee67$859a6ee0$17064e0c@MyComputer> "Rik van Riel" > If you seriously think people should work for > less than their own cost of living What on Earth does their cost of living have to do with anything? A person will hire you over somebody else if he thinks you will make him more money than somebody else, and that's it. You can complain and moralize and wail and pontificate about it from now to doomsday, you can scream to the heavens at the injustice of it all, you can beat your bloody fists at the cruel face of logic, but in the end nothing will change, not to the slightest degree. If you make less than $5.14 an hour for your employer he will never ever EVER pay you more than that regardless of what a so called minimum wage law decrees. For some screwy reason people have gotten the ridiculous idea that the minimum wage is $5.14 an hour, the true minimum wage is of course ZERO, and you could no more repeal that law of economics than you could repeal the law of gravity. However I do admit that it would be possible to double the true minimum wage, and I have absolutely no objection of you doing so. > put your money where your mouth is and live on a salary below minimum > wage yourself. No. I make quite a bit more than $5.14 an hour for my employer so he doesn't mind (well.... not too much anyway) paying me just a teeny tinny bit more than that. John K Clark From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 06:49:36 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:49:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511202249i6179822wba3d1991dec1a4ab@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > ### Minimum wages and labor laws. Illegitimate and destructive. > > Yeah, Rafal, why not go back to the days of the free lunch, as in "let them > eat cake"? > ### Well, actually, pre-Revolution France had an elaborate system of labor laws, designed (just as today's laws in France) to suppress the outsiders, and to benefit the incumbent. Why do you think the Arabs are rioting in France now, not far from where the good queen's blood was spilled on the pavement two hundred years ago? Not because they are Muslim, no, it's because the French state has never learned the lessons, and it still uses illegitimate and destructive minimum wage laws to suppress competition from outsiders. A pity that the Chiracs and other bureaucrats are unlikely to share her fate. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 06:57:05 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:57:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <003a01c5ee45$f84d5960$0b893cd1@pavilion> References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511201504q3131c614nd2a98d842a9d4276@mail.gmail.com> <004b01c5ee2c$0c3a82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <003a01c5ee45$f84d5960$0b893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511202257j35ffeeb5v9860cc7abb8a32b9@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, Technotranscendence wrote: If you agree > with that, then if someone wants to work for less than the government > imposed minimum wage or wants to work under rules different than the > government mandates, then why is that anyone else's business? Forcing > her or him to do otherwise is, in essence, almost like slavery because > you're limiting her or his choices. Now you might not like the > particular choices a person has or makes, but that's no reason to limit > that person's choices from the start. ### This actually cuts to my life personally. I am volunteering to do what I want and the thought of a government inspector busting the door to our lab and forbidding me to work unless the company can come up with more money for me is just unbearable. Yes, Olga, keep your jackbooted enforcers away from me. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 07:01:47 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 02:01:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <437E1A66.6040007@pobox.com> <012901c5ed32$0c270a40$070a4e0c@MyComputer> <002101c5edde$dc310590$90064e0c@MyComputer> <001901c5ee16$8520fcf0$630a4e0c@MyComputer> <088701c5ee29$17469a60$8a893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511202301h78367f80ja96120991ccea1b7@mail.gmail.com> On 11/20/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > > If you seriously think people should work for less than > their own cost of living, you might want to put your money > where your mouth is and live on a salary below minimum > wage yourself. ### I *am* volunteering for less than my cost of living. You have a problem with that? And are you going to forbid teenagers living with parents to make some extra bucks, unless the extra bucks cover their cost of living? Are you going to go after the boy who mows lawns for 4$/hour? Why would you do that? Rafal From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 07:33:13 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 02:33:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com><002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer><48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com><006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer><4CDF6226-6492-4929-96B7-50DE38C8FE3A@mac.com><001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer><13776929-0320-4809-9D81-6AA40C0600C7@mac.com> <001901c5ee44$0eb2c1b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> Message-ID: <007601c5ee6d$f5f139c0$17064e0c@MyComputer> : "Jack Parkinson" > I am arguing that small is good And I am arguing that small is, well..., small. Extropians like big things, very big things. Yes it's true they like Nanotechnology too, but that is HUGE. Jack if you like small unassuming humble little things then I'm wondering if the Extropians is the place for you. > The pressure on business is always towards amorality. The pressure on business is to get the better of labor and the pressure on labor is to get the better of business. I am not nearly smart enough to know where to draw the line between the two, neither are you, neither is anyone, but fortunately the free market is smart enough. > You may have thought it more reasonable had your comprehension of what I > said not been skewed about 180 degrees. Actually I think Samantha's comprehension of your "ideas" were skewed by exactly 360 degrees. John K Clark From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Mon Nov 21 08:04:07 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:04:07 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511171648.jAHGmBe25068@tick.javien.com><002b01c5ebf8$d5aa6d20$0201a8c0@JPAcer><48B627FE-0799-4AA3-AD89-23A79760CBA4@mac.com><006d01c5ec43$116569b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer><4CDF6226-6492-4929-96B7-50DE38C8FE3A@mac.com><001901c5ecf5$e84f7030$0201a8c0@JPAcer><13776929-0320-4809-9D81-6AA40C0600C7@mac.com> <001901c5ee44$0eb2c1b0$0201a8c0@JPAcer> <007601c5ee6d$f5f139c0$17064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <00f101c5ee72$2bb71b70$54df0405@EF02jack> From: "John K Clark" > Jack if you like small unassuming humble little things then I'm > wondering if the Extropians is the place for you. >John K Clark Nothing wrong with being small, unassuming and humble John. You should try it some time! Jack Parkinson From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 08:38:06 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 03:38:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com> <3A3306B6-69D4-401B-8D23-FE7F90F1D6AF@mac.com> Message-ID: <00b601c5ee76$ee5c38a0$17064e0c@MyComputer> Jack Parkinson > Nothing wrong with being small, unassuming and humble John. > You should try it some time! Well I would Jack but the thing is, unlike you I have nothing to be humble about. John K Clark From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 10:50:53 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 02:50:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> Message-ID: <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> On Nov 20, 2005, at 4:59 AM, gts wrote: > On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:07:30 -0500, Samantha Atkins > wrote: > > >> Does it matter if there is a consensus or not? >> > > Obviously it matters to me, or I would not have asked the question. > I have a high regard for extropian opinion. > As a thinker you are surely capable of evaluating the question yourself. Whether the majority of extropians or any other group concur is not very relevant to that. It is not at all obvious why you think it is important that there is a consensus on this. Which is why I asked. -s From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 21 12:16:20 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 07:16:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Minimum wages laws In-Reply-To: <1132554889.4293.49.camel@dmlap> References: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> <1132554889.4293.49.camel@dmlap> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, David Masten wrote: > On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 20:36 -0800, The Avantguardian wrote: > > In comparison, a sub-poverty level worker is also > > compelled to perform labor, but not for any one > > specific entity. Instead he is forced to work for > > anybody willing to pay him what meager wages he can > > get. > > Which in every case is better than the alternatives - in most countries > this would be prostitution, begging, or subsistence farming. On a sub-poverty wage, working is not an alternative to these. A job is something that needs to be done in addition to some of the above. After having lived in Brazil for a few years I do know some of the consequences of not paying people a living wage. There are slums filled with factory workers, who are desperately trying to keep their family alive on $100 to $150 a month. Thanks to a partially globalized market, the cost of most goods is comparable to European prices. However, importing goods from Brazil into Europe or the US is very heavily taxed, so it is extremely hard for a company in Brazil to make money... This results in families that live in slums, have food 2 out of 3 days and cannot afford to buy school books for their children. The only reason the children are allowed to go to school at all (instead of trying to make money) is that the government gives them some food at school. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 21 12:31:36 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 07:31:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com><3A3306B6-69D4-401B-8D23-FE7F90F1D6AF@mac.com> <00b601c5ee76$ee5c38a0$17064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <003901c5ee97$843d2800$58893cd1@pavilion> On Monday, November 21, 2005 3:38 AM John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote: > Jack Parkinson > >> Nothing wrong with being small, unassuming >> and humble John. You should try it some time! > > Well I would Jack but the thing is, unlike you I > have nothing to be humble about. Hey, let's not continue trading insults. I'm sure both of you passionately believe what you believe, but insulting each other is not going to resolve the dispute or allow you to remain friends even if it goes unresolved. Regards, Dan From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 21 13:15:00 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 08:15:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Minimum wages laws References: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009a01c5ee9d$9428b8a0$58893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:36 PM The Avantguardian avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com wrote: > Can somebody show me how this argument > is flawed? Is sweat-shop labor not cheaper > for the businesses that employ it than slaves > were for slave owners? Is not a slave that gets > fed, clothed, and housed not better off than an > employee who can't afford these things on > the wgaes he is paid? Well, you're assuming that only the worst jobs are available and that the laborer has not other alternatives -- even in the future. Obviously, the average worker would have to somehow earn above subsistence -- else she or he won't be alive long enough to benefit the employer in the long run. This doesn't mean government has to enforce it, just that people will find a way to make enough to live on or get support to otherwise live, such as through friends, family, and charity. But the whole of society must make enough to get by or else everyone would die out in short order. Since population is actually growing, it must be the case that wealth is at least increasing. The slave, on the other hand, has little choice in bettering her or himself. In ancient societies, slavery was typically the outcome of being defeated in battle, so perhaps it was better than being dead. (Yet value is subjective and some people obviously preferred death over slavery -- or why fight on or try to escape once enslaved?*) The total cost of slavery involves the cost of enforcing slavery. In slave owning societies, the cost of enforcing slavery was quite high, but the slaveholders managed to get the government to carry out the enforcement -- thus passing along part of the cost to tax payers in general rather than just slaveholders. Had the full costs of slavery been experienced by slaveholders -- say, in the South before 1861 -- it's likely the institution would've died out all the sooner. (Why? A slave holder in Georgia would have a hard time paying to have detectives track down and capture his or her runaway slave in another state, especially if no one else were forced to help in this. In reality, with things like the Fugitive Slave Law, the slave holder was able to pass along these costs to the US federal government -- in other words, to all US tax payers and not just those who held slaves and not even just those in the South.) As for what free laborers will be paid versus what slaves will get (in terms of food, lodging, and care), this will depend on the market, no? If the demand for labor is high and the supply is low, the laborer will be paid more, all other things being equal. Likewise, if the demand for slaves -- in a slave society, obviously -- is high and the supply is low, then the slave will cost more and slave owners are likely to take better care of their slaves. However, if the supply of slaves is high, all other things being equal, then the incentives line up in the other direction -- for not treating slaves better. Anyhow, other than that, I don't think you can make any claims from your armchair about what a slave will get. But if you're going to look at historical cases, then, e.g., freed blacks often did quite well in the South after emancipation, as detailed by Mark Thornton in his "The Economics of the Civil War" at: http://www.mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=71 The same is also true of the more peaceful emancipations made throughout the world during the 19th century. (In fact, IIRC, the US was the bloodiest, but that's because the 1861-5 war wasn't just about slavery.) Yes, there was an initial period of adjustment, but economic conditions generally improved in the long run -- and were it not for government interference to make things "better" probably would have improved more dramatically. Why would this be? Well, people were free to improve their lives and reap the full benefits of such improvements, however meager. (Any improvement in a slave's lot can be taken away at any moment. For instance, if the slave invents a method to get more wheat or cotton from a field, all other things being equal, he has no reason to carry out this method since she or he will likely not experience any betterment from it. The master, in fact, might not decrease the amount of work, so the slave would have no benefit, and assuming the disutility of labor (a general fact; if labor weren't experienced as a disutility, it wouldn't be labor) there is little or no incentive to make any changes. Hence the incentive to experiment and work harder or better is extremely low among slaves. This problem extends to all of society, since there are that many less people experimenting and working harder/better in slave societies. In essence, this is no different than taxation. If you are taxed more, then you have less incentive to be more productive. Since a slave, unlike a free man or women, has almost no control over where any increase in productivity goes, she or he has almost no incentive to improve her or his lot via improvements in productivity.) Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ * Obviously, it matters. Some people will fight to the death not to be enslaved. Others will not. It's strange to see people in developed countries arguing that slavery is better than sweatshops. They seem to be making the claim on how little people value freedom. In actual fact, we see people valuing freedom quite high. People don't get on tires to leave Cuba because they disvalue it. The same is true of the former Soviet empire. People lived perhaps not as good as in the West, yet they risked their lives to flee to freedom. Why was that? I don't think it was because of minimum wage laws. :) From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 14:27:04 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:27:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 05:50:53 -0500, Samantha Atkins wrote: > As a thinker you are surely capable of evaluating the question > yourself. Whether the majority of extropians or any other group concur > is not very relevant to that. It is not at all obvious why you think it > is important that there is a consensus on this. Which is why I asked. Obviously I have an opinion, as should be evident by the title of this thread and my first post on the subject. I agree with those who oppose ID as non-science in that it calls for a redefinition of science to include non-natural explanations of natural phenemena, and I agree with those who object on similar grounds that ID offers no explanation whatsover as to how the supposed Intelligent Designer intervenes in nature to create supposedly 'irreducibly complex' structures. However I have not actually read Behe's book, and I see that ID has captured the attention of some reasonably intelligent people, (see for example http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000091.html). Had I learned the subject was hotly debated here then I would have moved Behe's book up on my must-read list. Unlike its predecessor Creation Science, ID theory does have at least have the patina of real science. It seems to me that ID is a real threat to science education. -gts From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 21 14:48:36 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:48:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051121144835.GZ2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:27:04AM -0500, gts wrote: > Unlike its predecessor Creation Science, ID theory does have at least have > the patina of real science. It seems to me that ID is a real threat to Excuse me?! There's no mistaking cargo cult for the real thing. > science education. Only where's resurgence of religious fundamentalism. Science as a candle in the dark, indeed. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 15:19:10 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:19:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051121144835.GZ2249@leitl.org> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> <20051121144835.GZ2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:48:36 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:27:04AM -0500, gts wrote: > >> Unlike its predecessor Creation Science, ID theory does have at least >> have the patina of real science. It seems to me that ID is a real >> threat to > > Excuse me?! There's no mistaking cargo cult for the real thing. True for you and me, but not true in Kansas where ID has already scored a victory, and evidently not true in the Whitehouse, where Bush has spoken in favor of teaching it. Creation Science was easy to debunk, but unlike Creation Science, ID cannot be attacked as derived directly from biblical revelation. Its proponents are deliberately silent about the identity and nature of the supposed Designer. The debunking of ID requires a little insight into the philosophy of science and a proper understanding of the scientific method, both of which seem to be sorely lacking in this country (present company excluded). The political climate is also ripe for the teaching of ID, "For example, as CBS poll this month found that 51 percent of respondents believed humans were created in their present form by God." http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051028/sc_nm/science_usa_dc Science educators are right to be concerned! -gts From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 21 15:39:12 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:39:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051119002333.01d4f528@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <145BE4A0-1DFE-4FDC-BF45-1224864F5500@mac.com> <7DF5006F-A716-4647-BB6E-B97181379D29@mac.com> <20051121144835.GZ2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051121153912.GB2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:19:10AM -0500, gts wrote: > True for you and me, but not true in Kansas where ID has already scored a > victory, and evidently not true in the Whitehouse, where Bush has spoken > in favor of teaching it. I realize that a few places in the world have turned to religious fundamentalism, and hence self-effected a slide into insignificance. I'm not sure what we can/should do about it, though. We can't disassociate people from effects of their own actions. Nor should we, it's a learning experience. > Creation Science was easy to debunk, but unlike Creation Science, ID It is impossible to debunk something with rational discourse what hasn't been gained by rational discourse. Here ID is no different from Creation "Science". It's just more lipstick on the same pig. > cannot be attacked as derived directly from biblical revelation. Its > proponents are deliberately silent about the identity and nature of the > supposed Designer. > > The debunking of ID requires a little insight into the philosophy of > science and a proper understanding of the scientific method, both of which > seem to be sorely lacking in this country (present company excluded). You've cut to the core of the problem. Scientific illiterates can't be taught science against their will. Arguments from authority don't work. What is left to do? Fight. If you lose, leave. That's about it. > The political climate is also ripe for the teaching of ID, "For example, > as CBS poll this month found that 51 percent of respondents believed > humans were created in their present form by God." > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051028/sc_nm/science_usa_dc So you see the roots of the problem are not in ID, it's just a symptom. > Science educators are right to be concerned! If they are overruled, the only correct thing to do is to pack and leave. Too bad about the kids, though. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 15:54:59 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:54:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Minimum wages laws References: <20051121043604.17900.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001d01c5eeb4$17003260$180e4e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > In some ways I think a below poverty level minimum > wage is worse than slavery. That's true, but what is your point? Is it that poverty is bad? If so you have a keen grasp of the obvious. Yes, I'm certain that some people living today have a worse life than the average slave of 200 years ago, at least slaves seldom starved to death. The solution is to find a way for these desperately poor people to have more wealth and in the long run they will not obtain it by somebody just handing it to them, they will need to create it. In other words we need to unleash the free market on them, And we're not talking theory here, we know it will work because it has worked. Pushing for an international minimum wage law would make a lot of people glow with virtuous intent, it would let them show off to the world how caring and empathetic they are to the underclass; never mind that it will not lift one person out of grinding poverty and will only increase the numbers in that horrible situation. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 16:51:39 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:51:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? (was: Riots in France) In-Reply-To: References: <20051113122527.3108.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c5e894$0df71e70$32074e0c@MyComputer> <7641ddc60511142253s3c7ba35h58a9d8f388985032@mail.gmail.com> <019401c5eba1$09f6fa10$7f0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132475460.4293.15.camel@dmlap> <7641ddc60511200213m569f13b1i5b3c189771589507@mail.gmail.com> <002d01c5ee03$fed4d200$6600a8c0@brainiac> <7641ddc60511201503q1d5c8f3cj4d4beba9a53bb50b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > On Nov 20, 2005, at 3:03 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> ### A scholar, yes, but hardly a gentleman. I am a redneck in good >> standing, my house is two miles away from the nearest neighbor, I >> shoot my pistols in the backyard, and occasionally pee from the porch >> in broad daylight. Apparently your kinfolk never learned you right, Rafal. A proper gentleman would move his outhouse closer to the porch and leave the door open. Though originally from Ca, I spent the last four years living in Elizabehtown, Ky, (the setting of a really bad movie currently playing at a theater near you). Elizabethtown has a Wal*Mart, and one might argue it was Wal*Mart that put the town on the map. I knew the town had finally made it when they got a Best Buy, too. :) -gts From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 17:21:42 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:21:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051119222700.GD2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eugen Leitl wrote: > There's zero evidence for SA. I am VERY certain that I live in at least layer of simulation. Whether there are further nested layers, I am not certain. The computer that the one simulation I know of is running on is my brain. In my brain all things that I have ever percieved so much as the shadow of is being simulated, including you and your response to this email. Of course my simulation of you is not so perfect that I can state with any degree of accuracy what your response will be. So I look forward to it with anticipation. ;) Is that air you are breathing, Eugen? Or is air merely the SIMULATION of what you are actually breathing? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 17:31:40 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:31:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051121173140.36490.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> --- gts wrote: > Unlike its predecessor Creation Science, ID theory > does have at least have > the patina of real science. It seems to me that ID > is a real threat to > science education. You know, I would not object so strongly to ID if it was spun as a hypothesis rather than a full blown theory. If they said it was a hypothesis, I would say, "Fine... go do some experiments and show me your results." But when they say it's a theory with no data to back it up, it bugs me. Their only justification seems to be gaps in our knowledge. All manner of bizarre explanations could be used to fill those gaps if imagination were to be given free reign. Perhaps all of reality is just our collective consensual dream and death is a rude awakening. Just my two cents. :) The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 21 18:12:20 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:12:20 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511211812.jALICScr006165@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Amara, Thanks for showing us this "The Kansas School Board is right" piece. I completely agree with this: "Scientists have to get off this kick that science and religion are completely distinct magisteria that have nothing to do with each other. Quite the contrary; religion (at least in its common Western forms) goes around making claims about how the world works, and it's perfectly appropriate to judge such claims by the same standards that we judge any other suggested hypotheses about nature." These "separate magisterial" scientists are arguing science can tell us what we can do but it doesn't tell us what we should do. Which is again, completely wrong and irrational. Morals are and should be subject to rational and scientific thought just as much as anything else we think about. Brent Allsop > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Amara Graps > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:55 AM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID > > >ID seen from another palace of the Vatican City. > >http://www.comcast.net/news/science/index.jsp?cat=SCIENCE > > Nice. I do wonder if Ratzinger is aware of what his chief astronomer > said, though. If any here have questions of the ID view from the Vatican > Observatory (that _other_ piece of the Vatican City country located in > the middle of Italy's Castel Gandolfo), I will be visiting there in > about 10 days and I can ask. > > Within the teeth-gnashing of ID, here is a perspective that I think > is good to keep in mind: > > The Kansas School Board is right > http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/11/16/the-kansas-school-board-is-right/ > > Amara > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 18:20:46 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:20:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051121173140.36490.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051121173140.36490.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:31:40 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > But when they say it's a theory with no data > to back it up, it bugs me. Their only justification > seems to be gaps in our knowledge. The cornerstone of the so-called theory (I agree it is not a valid theory) is "irreducible complexity" and they do offer supposed statistical data to support the claim that some biological structures are irreducibly complex and so could not have evolved naturally. If such structures really exist then ID would seem a reasonable hypothesis. However, as far as I can tell, no such structures exist. They muddy the waters further by positing that the same Intelligent Designer also designed the universe, an idea I do not oppose and which is not itself an affront to natural science or the theory of evolution. Like their Creation Science predecessors, ID proponents wrongly characterize evolution as an inherently atheistic doctrine. I'm glad at least that the Vatican knows better than to support ID. Apparently the Catholic Church learned something from Galileo. -gts From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 21 18:51:59 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:51:59 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <004201c5ee67$859a6ee0$17064e0c@MyComputer> References: <004201c5ee67$859a6ee0$17064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, John K Clark wrote: > "Rik van Riel" > > > If you seriously think people should work for > > less than their own cost of living > > What on Earth does their cost of living have to do with anything? It's the difference between creating a society of laborers and creating a society of consumers. Hammer and sickle vs. shopping cart... -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Mon Nov 21 19:04:44 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:04:44 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality References: <200511210010.jAL0AKe11828@tick.javien.com><3A3306B6-69D4-401B-8D23-FE7F90F1D6AF@mac.com><00b601c5ee76$ee5c38a0$17064e0c@MyComputer> <003901c5ee97$843d2800$58893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <024601c5eece$6f3dec50$8998e03c@homepc> Technotranscendence wrote: > On Monday, November 21, 2005 3:38 AM >> John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote: >> Jack Parkinson >> >>> Nothing wrong with being small, unassuming >>> and humble John. You should try it some time! >> >> Well I would Jack but the thing is, unlike you I >> have nothing to be humble about. > > Hey, let's not continue trading insults. Yeah, I second this. Its getting boring. Depressing even, because both John and Jack, when they are trying to argue their points on their merits are at least likeable for that. But when the cheap insults start to fly and just keep on coming it doesn't seem like the people involved are worth the trouble of responding to at all. There are real issues worth exploring in this set of threads, but the cheap shot to intelligent or even genuine comment ratio makes it seem hardly worth it. Brett Paatsch From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 21 19:07:57 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:07:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <200511211908.jALJ81cr011365@ra.pacificwebworks.com> I don't believe in the simulation argument for two reasons. 1. Our consciousness is made up of qualia or phenomenal properties. While these can be simulated or modeled by other abstract phenomena - the simulations isn't like the real thing. We could be brains in vats, and the rest of the world being simulated. But the brain, or whatever is producing these phenomenal properties in our consciousness cannot be simulated. They are the real thing. 2. I believe and hope that any being powerful enough to "design" any such system would also, via logic, be a moral/benevolent being. In other words, they would never produce so much suffering and ignorance as we experience for any reason because such would be immoral. I have confidence that whatever they would be trying to accomplish with such a simulation, could be accomplished without so much phenomenal/conscious suffering. In other words, the existence of evil is the proof that God or any intelligent designer does not YET exist. At least I hope such is true and I would be willing to bet my eternal life (risk going to hell for eternity because I do not believe in God...) on it. Brent Allsop > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl > Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:20 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] against ID > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 02:03:22PM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > > But many transhumanists do believe in ID in the guise of the > > Simulation Argument. > > Not this transhumanist. > > Can we see a show of hands? Who of you here actually believes in > SA in a strong sense? I.e., would you be willing to bet your life > on it? > > -- > Eugen* Leitl leitl > ______________________________________________________________ > ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org > 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 21 19:09:09 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:09:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID Message-ID: gts: >I'm glad at least that the Vatican knows better than to support ID. >Apparently the Catholic Church learned something from Galileo. The Vatican *Observatory* you mean. I am not sure that the astronomers at the Observatory are representing the Pope's view. I will ask them next week. Greetings from a Europlanet meeting in Hannover, Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 19:08:03 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:08:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <200511211812.jALICScr006165@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511211812.jALICScr006165@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:12:20 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > I completely agree with this: > > "Scientists have to get off this kick that science and religion are > completely distinct magisteria that have nothing to do with each other. > Quite the contrary; religion (at least in its common Western forms) goes > around making claims about how the world works, and it's perfectly > appropriate to judge such claims by the same standards that we judge any > other suggested hypotheses about nature." The real question here is "What should we teach in science class?" As Behe himself was forced to admit in court in Pa a couple of weeks ago, by his definition of science (which removes the requirement that science be about natural explanations), the theory of astrology qualifies as science. By his reasoning, we should we teach astrology as an alternative to psychology for the same reason we should teach ID as an alternative to evolution. And they're still telling the same old lies of their Creation Science predecessors... no transitional fossils, etc, and trying to frame the issue in terms of free speech when it's really about proper education. -gts From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Mon Nov 21 19:16:05 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:16:05 +1100 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Damien Broderick wrote: > It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, > but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here > are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the > top 2 IQ percentiles. I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard deviation above the mean than two. Brett Paatsch From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 19:19:52 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:19:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:09:09 -0500, Amara Graps wrote: > gts: >> I'm glad at least that the Vatican knows better than to support ID. >> Apparently the Catholic Church learned something from Galileo. > > The Vatican *Observatory* you mean. I am not sure that the astronomers > at the Observatory are representing the Pope's view. I will ask them > next week. I think you'll find that the Vatican has been a supporter of evolution theory for some time. The official Catholic position is that humans evolved naturally but are endowed by God with souls. -gts From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 19:25:24 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:25:24 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, > > but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here > > are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the > > top 2 IQ percentiles. > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > deviation above the mean than two. > > INTJ, member of Mensa Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 21 19:33:45 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:33:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <20051121193345.28608.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, > > but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here > > are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in > the > > top 2 IQ percentiles. > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > deviation above the mean than two. Side note: I'm in Mensa (the organization whose only membership requirement is taking one of the standardized IQ tests they recognize and scoring in the top 2%), and...to be honest, aside from the focus on certain types of topics, one might not be able to tell most of the messages of this mailing list from those of their mailing lists just by reading the message bodies (sans the headers and footers where the list labels are, and with obvious exceptions like messages discussing ExI or Mensa). That said, I know certain others here are likewise members of both; perhaps they can spot more of a difference. From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 21 19:37:13 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:37:13 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <200511211908.jALJ81cr011365@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <20051119202027.GA2249@leitl.org> <200511211908.jALJ81cr011365@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <20051121193712.GL2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 12:07:57PM -0700, Brent Allsop wrote: > I don't believe in the simulation argument for two reasons. I don't believe in SA (or an effective infinity of similiar production processes) for one reason: we don't have one shred of evidence for it. > 1. Our consciousness is made up of qualia or phenomenal properties. While Did you know that phlogiston has negative weight? http://www.jimloy.com/physics/phlogstn.htm > these can be simulated or modeled by other abstract phenomena - the > simulations isn't like the real thing. We could be brains in vats, and the Ich kann, so zu sagen, mein chemisches Wasser nicht halten und muss ihnen sagen, dich Harnstoff machen kann, ohne dazu die Niere oder ueberhaupt ein Thier, sey es Mensch oder Hund, noethig zu haben. > rest of the world being simulated. But the brain, or whatever is producing > these phenomenal properties in our consciousness cannot be simulated. They > are the real thing. Computers can't play chess. They can only simulate playing chess. > 2. I believe and hope that any being powerful enough to "design" any such > system would also, via logic, be a moral/benevolent being. In other words, Why do ALife researchers simulate virtual landscapes, red in tooth and claw? They're ethical allright. They just don't see the critters suffering, they're not complex enough by far. People are not complex enough to feel fremth and to drial 0x89797afdfds9798afd, thus people are safe to simulate. > they would never produce so much suffering and ignorance as we experience > for any reason because such would be immoral. I have confidence that > whatever they would be trying to accomplish with such a simulation, could be > accomplished without so much phenomenal/conscious suffering. In other Allright, just remove consciousness, and feel the simulation with zombies. Torture them all you will, they won't feel a thing. > words, the existence of evil is the proof that God or any intelligent > designer does not YET exist. At least I hope such is true and I would be > willing to bet my eternal life (risk going to hell for eternity because I do > not believe in God...) on it. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 19:44:55 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:44:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here's an attempt to simulate a simulation: "A Dutch television producer, who previously brought you Big Brother, now produces a show for British commercial television were you witness the training of three lucky guys to become astronauts and their subsequent launch into earth's orbit for 4 days. They are trained in a Russian facility and are launched with a Russian rocket. There is only one catch: it's all fake. When they leave their orbiter to make a space walk they will be welcomed by their family and friends, and find out they never left England. If I were one of the contestants I'd go postal after this. But of course these contestants were specially selected to be prone to suggestion, so they will probably just forever hide in corner so they won't hear the constant mockery.." http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/46863 -gts From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 21 20:01:56 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:01:56 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 02:44:55PM -0500, gts wrote: > launch into earth's orbit for 4 days. They are trained in a Russian > facility and are launched with a Russian rocket. There is only one catch: > it's all fake. When they leave their orbiter to make a space walk they > will be welcomed by their family and friends, and find out they never left > England. http://lib.ru/PELEWIN/omon_engl.txt http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374225923/103-9241156-8979062?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From godsdice at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:02:32 2005 From: godsdice at gmail.com (xllb) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:02:32 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051121193345.28608.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <20051121193345.28608.qmail@web81612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 1. Has anyone included MENSA membership on a resume? What was the reaction of the readers? 2. I thought it might be affirming to find out that I qualified. MENSA's web site told me that a high enough LSAT score would automatically get me in. I immediately called my Law School Records Office to ask how I'd go about getting confirmation of my score. 3. It turns out that their records don't go back that far. I have never felt so old. Regards, Rick On 11/21/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Damien Broderick wrote: > > > It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, > > > but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here > > > are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in > > the > > > top 2 IQ percentiles. > > > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > > > > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > > deviation above the mean than two. > > Side note: I'm in Mensa (the organization whose only membership > requirement is taking one of the standardized IQ tests they recognize > and scoring in the top 2%), and...to be honest, aside from the focus > on certain types of topics, one might not be able to tell most of the > messages of this mailing list from those of their mailing lists just by > reading the message bodies (sans the headers and footers where the list > labels are, and with obvious exceptions like messages discussing ExI or > Mensa). That said, I know certain others here are likewise members of > both; perhaps they can spot more of a difference. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Hell is overkill. Dogma blinds. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 21 20:07:53 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:07:53 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an embarrasement to our IQ number since such lukewarm IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. :-[ :-$ :-D Brett Paatsch wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > >> It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, >> but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here >> are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the >> top 2 IQ percentiles. > > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > deviation above the mean than two. > > Brett Paatsch > From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 21 20:08:05 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:08:05 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an embarrasement to our IQ number since such lukewarm IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. :-[ :-$ :-D Brett Paatsch wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > >> It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, >> but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here >> are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the >> top 2 IQ percentiles. > > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > deviation above the mean than two. > > Brett Paatsch > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:04:15 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:04:15 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 02:44:55PM -0500, gts wrote: > > > launch into earth's orbit for 4 days. They are trained in a Russian > > facility and are launched with a Russian rocket. There is only one > catch: > > it's all fake. When they leave their orbiter to make a space walk they > > will be welcomed by their family and friends, and find out they never > left > > England. > > http://lib.ru/PELEWIN/omon_engl.txt > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374225923/103-9241156-8979062?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance > > I would have thought that gravity would have been a bit of a giveaway. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:06:42 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:06:42 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an embarrasement to > our IQ number since such lukewarm > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > > That's because high IQ too often leads to an unattractive combination of laziness and arrogance. The world works on personality rather than IQ Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mfj.eav at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:10:28 2005 From: mfj.eav at gmail.com (Morris Johnson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:10:28 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <61c8738e0511211210ge1dd482t98cc4bd8aa1cf3f0@mail.gmail.com> I got mine from my school about 10 years after grad. I went back for a second copy this last month to find they were all shredded. So it's going to be photocopies of photocopies and none of those old kiddie pics copied on better quality modern copiers. MFJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 20:08:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:08:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:04:15 -0500, Dirk Bruere wrote: > I would have thought that gravity would have been a bit of a giveaway. "the crew will be told that they will be soaring to an altitude of some 100 kilometres, which is enough to qualify for astronaut status, but not to induce weightlessness." -gts From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 21 20:19:02 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:19:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <43822BB6.6000001@sasktel.net> They might tell them that they are testing new technology to simulate gravity in the cabin and ask them to evaluate its efficiency and effectiveness.???? Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/21/05, Eugen Leitl > > wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 02:44:55PM -0500, gts wrote: > > > launch into earth's orbit for 4 days. They are trained in a Russian > > facility and are launched with a Russian rocket. There is only > one catch: > > it's all fake. When they leave their orbiter to make a space > walk they > > will be welcomed by their family and friends, and find out they > never left > > England. > > http://lib.ru/PELEWIN/omon_engl.txt > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374225923/103-9241156-8979062?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance > > > > I would have thought that gravity would have been a bit of a giveaway. > > Dirk > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:29:51 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:29:51 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] the truman show In-Reply-To: References: <20051121172142.32487.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> <20051121200156.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, gts wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:04:15 -0500, Dirk Bruere > wrote: > > > I would have thought that gravity would have been a bit of a giveaway. > > "the crew will be told that they will be soaring to an altitude of some > 100 kilometres, which is enough to qualify for astronaut status, but not > to induce weightlessness." The fact that I know this is wrong would probably disqualify me from being a contestant. Only scientific illiterates need apply. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 20:31:47 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:31:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID. References: Message-ID: <006c01c5eeda$9d5f0ae0$3b0c4e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > The official Catholic position is that humans > evolved naturally but are endowed by God with souls. That was the old Pope's line but the new one seems to be backing away from that, gradually of course, can't go too fast, Popes never make mistakes living or dead. Actually I can understand the church's discomfort; a benevolent God who could just snap his fingers and bring all of life into being but instead decided to use a hideously cruel system like Evolution is logically inconsistent. But that's not what will fuel real controversy in theological circles and stoke emotions to a fever pitch; the new Pope doesn't like Harry Potter. John K Clark From mfj.eav at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 20:41:33 2005 From: mfj.eav at gmail.com (Morris Johnson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:41:33 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> So IQ PLUS ENTJ turns an Einstein into a world leader. On 11/21/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > > On 11/21/05, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > > > > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an embarrasement to > > our IQ number since such lukewarm > > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > > > > > That's because high IQ too often leads to an unattractive combination of > laziness and arrogance. > The world works on personality rather than IQ > > Dirk > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > -- LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc. Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. Mission: To Preserve, Protect and Enhance Lifespan Plant-based Natural-health Bio-product Bio-pharmaceuticals http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan http://www.4XtraLifespans.bravehost.com megao at sasktel.net, arla_j at hotmail.com, mfj.eav at gmail.com extropian.pharmer at gmail.com Extreme Life-Extension ..."The most dangerous idea on earth" -Leon Kass , Bioethics Advisor to George Herbert Walker Bush, June 2005 Radical Life-Extension Bioscience + Total Information Awareness Globalized Info-science = The 21st Century Paradigm ........ Re-inventing the Human Condition with Quantum to Macro Biomolecular-engineering *"I will live each and every 50 years, one at a time, like the days of a week".... Morris Johnson - June 2005* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Nov 21 20:43:25 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:43:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Jack's right, he's not ready for reality In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511202301h78367f80ja96120991ccea1b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005f01c5eedc$3de571b0$74550318@ZANDRA2> Teenagers working odd jobs low pay are 99% of the time part of the hidden economy of people working off the books and generate mostly unreported income although in small amounts. If the teenager work full-time however, the employer can get into big trouble with the government if something bad happens and the teenager is hurt or sues the employer for violating the labor laws. It is my understanding that the employer would be forced to go back an compensate the teenager for all hours worked bringing them up to minimum wage. In truth where I live however teenagers expect a good bit more than minimum wage for mowing a yard especially if they provide their own lawnmower. Rafal said... >> And are you going to forbid teenagers living with parents to make some extra bucks, unless the extra bucks cover their cost of living? Are you going to go after the boy who mows lawns for 4$/hour? Why would you do that? From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 20:58:42 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:58:42 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <20051121173140.36490.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <823C7E91-FB4C-4F53-840C-F2E0CF6BDEB9@mac.com> On Nov 21, 2005, at 10:20 AM, gts wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:31:40 -0500, The Avantguardian > wrote: > > >> But when they say it's a theory with no data >> to back it up, it bugs me. Their only justification >> seems to be gaps in our knowledge. >> > > The cornerstone of the so-called theory (I agree it is not a valid > theory) is "irreducible complexity" and they do offer supposed > statistical data to support the claim that some biological > structures are irreducibly complex and so could not have evolved > naturally. If such structures really exist then ID would seem a > reasonable hypothesis. However, as far as I can tell, no such > structures exist. > These folks are still rolling out the human eye as irreducibly complex. Dawson showed by running a genetic algorithm how a very sophisticated eye could evolve over time years ago. Bt they still trot this out. > They muddy the waters further by positing that the same Intelligent > Designer also designed the universe, an idea I do not oppose and > which is not itself an affront to natural science or the theory of > evolution. Like their Creation Science predecessors, ID proponents > wrongly characterize evolution as an inherently atheistic doctrine. > This sort of claim is not remotely science and shows their true agenda. To go from a critique of evolution to saying only an intelligent designer (aka GOD) could explain the data to claiming evolution (despite having more data for it than almost any theory in science) is completely false to claiming that a superior being not only whipped us up (along with all that bothersome evidence for evolution) and also designed the entire universe (which would be even harder to get scientific evidence for) shows clearly that this junk is not remotely science. > I'm glad at least that the Vatican knows better than to support ID. > Apparently the Catholic Church learned something from Galileo. > Since they bolted together the Bible over contentious centuries they also should have more sense than to believe it is literal truth. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 21:03:36 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:03:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: References: <200511211812.jALICScr006165@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <87B4271C-7F66-41A9-A808-16575833BF1D@mac.com> On Nov 21, 2005, at 11:08 AM, gts wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:12:20 -0500, Brent Allsop > wrote: > > >> I completely agree with this: >> >> "Scientists have to get off this kick that science and religion are >> completely distinct magisteria that have nothing to do with each >> other. >> Quite the contrary; religion (at least in its common Western >> forms) goes >> around making claims about how the world works, and it's perfectly >> appropriate to judge such claims by the same standards that we >> judge any >> other suggested hypotheses about nature." >> > > The real question here is "What should we teach in science class?" > Why, we should teach science. That excludes pretentious nonsense that explains nothing and denies an entire major body of scientific knowledge. > As Behe himself was forced to admit in court in Pa a couple of > weeks ago, by his definition of science (which removes the > requirement that science be about natural explanations), the theory > of astrology qualifies as science. > Oh my. After all we had a former president who consulted with astrologers so it must be true. - samantha From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 21 21:08:40 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:08:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- xllb wrote: > 1. Has anyone included MENSA membership on a resume? What was the > reaction > of the readers? Someone, somewhere, has undoubtedly done so, and someone, somewhere, has undoubtedly done so to positive effect. However, the consensus, whenever this is raised within Mensa's disucssion lists, is that it's most often better to omit it lest it be perceived as evidence of arrogance, boasting, and other qualities unhelpful to most jobs. (In the rare case that the employer wants Mensans specifically, the employer will usually explicitly ask, either in the want ad or in the interview.) > 2. I thought it might be affirming to find out that I qualified. > MENSA's web > site told me that a high enough LSAT score would automatically get me > in. I > immediately called my Law School Records Office to ask how I'd go > about > getting confirmation of my score. Mensa accepts most of the standardized tests used for college admissions, albeit depending on the year you took them (to reflect changing demographics and, more importantly, changing tests - a score that would qualify in one given year may only reflect the upper fifth percentile in another year). I recall there was some controversy a few years back about dropping one of them - it may have been the SAT - because the test was becoming too subjective to measure IQ. > 3. It turns out that their records don't go back that far. I have > never felt > so old. This relates to a topic I've idly wondered about on occasion, but never enough to google it: how much of a problem do 30-and-overs, who have not been in an academic environment for many years, but who now seek to enter or re-enter college (say, to get the degree they should have sought immediately after high school but did not for whatever reason), face from the fact that their transcripts, test scores, and other academic records (normally used by colleges for determining who to admit) are largely no longer available? From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 21 21:13:33 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:13:33 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> On Nov 21, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an > embarrasement to our IQ number since such lukewarm > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > :-[ > I found Mensa disappointing. With a few wonderful exceptions the meetings were mostly about finding someone smart to date and playing countless board games. The vast majority of the people seemed to be terribly ineffectual in life and be doing little with their brains except for passionate time consuming involvement in some very arcane and useless avocation. - samantha From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 21:17:54 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:17:54 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > On Nov 21, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > > > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an > > embarrasement to our IQ number since such lukewarm > > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > > :-[ > > > > I found Mensa disappointing. With a few wonderful exceptions the > meetings were mostly about finding someone smart to date and playing > countless board games. The vast majority of the people seemed to be > terribly ineffectual in life and be doing little with their brains > except for passionate time consuming involvement in some very arcane > and useless avocation. > > I found that as well. Which is why I dropped out from it 25yrs ago. I recently rejoined. I doubt I'll renew my membership for another year, since it seems not much has changed. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 21 21:27:18 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:27:18 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: <200511211908.jALJ81cr011365@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <002f01c5eee2$5a70f920$cdb41b97@administxl09yj> From: "Brent Allsop" > In other words, the existence of evil > is the proof that God or any intelligent > designer does not YET exist. That might be a good argument against this 'solution' of the 'Great Predictor' paradox (Newcomb's paradox) :-) http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/2005/11/dude-its-like-you-read-my-mind.htm l From mbb386 at main.nc.us Mon Nov 21 21:26:24 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:26:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51038.72.236.102.75.1132608384.squirrel@main.nc.us> > This relates to a topic I've idly wondered about on occasion, but never > enough to google it: how much of a problem do 30-and-overs, who have > not been in an academic environment for many years, but who now seek to > enter or re-enter college (say, to get the degree they should have > sought immediately after high school but did not for whatever reason), > face from the fact that their transcripts, test scores, and other > academic records (normally used by colleges for determining who to > admit) are largely no longer available? > One thing they need is their childhood vaccination records - official ones signed by the doctor... who of course may long since be dead. My nephew went through this at University of North Carolina just within the last couple of years. He'd dropped out some years before and was re-entering. The old records the university had on hand were *no longer acceptable*! He had to have blood tests done to prove that he had the proper antibodies or do the shots - all of them - all over again. Which has its own dangers. The records *he* had were his mother's hand written ones in his baby book. Therefore, I immediately wrote to my children's pediatrician and purchased multiple official copies of their childhood shot records. Shared them out with the (now adult) kids and kept a copy of each in the bank vault too. Geez. What a nuisance. So if you have interest in going back to school, this might be a wise thing to get hold of ASAP. Regards, MB From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 21 21:31:03 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:31:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID. References: <20051121173140.36490.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com> <823C7E91-FB4C-4F53-840C-F2E0CF6BDEB9@mac.com> Message-ID: <016401c5eee2$ecd68af0$3b0c4e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > The official Catholic position is that humans > evolved naturally but are endowed by God with souls. That was the old Pope's line but the new one seems to be backing away from that, gradually of course, can't go too fast, Popes never make mistakes living or dead. Actually I can understand the church's discomfort; a benevolent God who could just snap his fingers and bring all of life into being but instead decided to use a hideously cruel system like Evolution is logically inconsistent. But that's not what will fuel real controversy in theological circles and stoke emotions to a fever pitch; the new Pope doesn't like Harry Potter. John K Clark From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 21 21:41:29 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:41:29 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Viagra for the brain. In-Reply-To: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43823F09.9060905@sasktel.net> > <>This relates to a topic I've idly wondered about on occasion, but never > enough to google it: how much of a problem do 30-and-overs, who have > not been in an academic environment for many years, but who now seek to > enter or re-enter college (say, to get the degree they should have > sought immediately after high school but did not for whatever reason), > face from the fact that their transcripts, test scores, and other > academic records (normally used by colleges for determining who to > admit) are largely no longer available? > ______________________________________________ That would be me. Graduated high school in 1973. Farmed, read journals...... but never went back to school till this fall as our gov't now requires a degree in HACCP for Food Safety or the equivalent diploma to file for QA officer for our business with HC product apps. Our last child has entered university this fall and .. whoops .... dad now brings up the rear. Appropriately my Nov issue of BioPharm International has a piece on pgs 18 and 19 .... "Viagra for the Brain" ..... for the 79 million baby boomers "On Wall Street total recall is an absolute necessity. If the biopharmaceutical industry can give Main Street a memory drug that will do what Viagra did for the boomers, believe me, investors will have a long memory." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 21:43:08 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:43:08 +1300 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> Message-ID: Would anybody be interested in finding out just what the IQ distribution of ExI chat is? If so, I reccomend we use something like the tickle classic IQ test: http://web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/?test=uiqogt To prevent this from turning into a pissing contest and decrease the likelihood of people lieing, I volunteer to collect peoples IQ scores via email and make some nice graphs of the distribution. Once done I'll destroy the emails with your IQs and promptly forget the actual values. Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may bias the distribution - and please be honest! Cheers, Joel From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 21:50:42 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:50:42 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: IQ distribution Message-ID: Sorry for posting the following twice, but I forgot to specify a new subject and thought it'd worth starting a new thread for this. ---- Would anybody be interested in finding out just what the IQ distribution of ExI chat is? If so, I reccomend we use something like the tickle classic IQ test: http://web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/?test=uiqogt To prevent this from turning into a pissing contest and decrease the likelihood of people lieing, I volunteer to collect peoples IQ scores via email and make some nice graphs of the distribution. Once done I'll destroy the emails with your IQs and promptly forget the actual values. Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may bias the distribution - and please be honest! Cheers, Joel From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 21:58:43 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:58:43 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Viagra for the brain. In-Reply-To: <43823F09.9060905@sasktel.net> References: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43823F09.9060905@sasktel.net> Message-ID: Piracetam and Gingko Biloba (+ others) have been around for a long time. Unfortunately something like memory is very subjective, so even if your memory is improved, how do you know? A loss of memory is also sometimes good to forget traumatic situations and until we can selective edit/prioritise our memories I think total recall would end up being a curse for all but the most self-controlled and at peace individuals. On 11/22/05, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > Appropriately my Nov issue of BioPharm International has a piece on pgs 18 > and 19 .... > "Viagra for the Brain" ..... for the 79 million baby boomers > > "On Wall Street total recall is an absolute necessity. If the > biopharmaceutical industry can give Main Street a memory drug that > will do what Viagra did for the boomers, believe me, investors will have a > long memory." > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 22:09:30 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:09:30 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: > > Would anybody be interested in finding out just what the IQ > distribution of ExI chat is? > > If so, I reccomend we use something like the tickle classic IQ test: > http://web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/?test=uiqogt > > To prevent this from turning into a pissing contest and decrease the > likelihood of people lieing, I volunteer to collect peoples IQ scores > via email and make some nice graphs of the distribution. Once done > I'll destroy the emails with your IQs and promptly forget the actual > values. > > Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may > bias the distribution - and please be honest! > > Just did a quick check - 133 Seems I should be drummed out of Mensa... What's the scale? Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 22:10:49 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:10:49 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Viagra for the brain. In-Reply-To: References: <20051121210841.17816.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43823F09.9060905@sasktel.net> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: > > Piracetam and Gingko Biloba (+ others) have been around for a long time. > > Unfortunately something like memory is very subjective, so even if > your memory is improved, how do you know? > > A loss of memory is also sometimes good to forget traumatic situations > and until we can selective edit/prioritise our memories I think total > recall would end up being a curse for all but the most self-controlled > and at peace individuals. > > OTOH a vastly increased short term memory would be quite useful. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From xander25 at adelphia.net Mon Nov 21 15:22:04 2005 From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob Bennett) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:22:04 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <4381E61C.5020203@adelphia.net> Brett Paatsch wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > >> It's hard for us self-starter INTJs to grasp that hapless dynamic, >> but then we're less than 5% of the population, and most of us here >> are a slimmer slice through that group as well, being at least in the >> top 2 IQ percentiles. > > > I wish it were so but I reckon this flatters or genuinely overrates > "most of us here" by about a standard deviation. > I'd estimate the mid-point of the curve as closer to one standard > deviation above the mean than two. > > Brett Paatsch > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > Personally, I question the validity of these tests. I am rated an INFP by all the tests I've taken. When I was leaving the Air Force I took these tests in association with a transition program designed to help Airman find careers once they leave. It was recommended for INFP's find a career working with people: counselor, etc... That's where it said I would be the happiest. Personally, I take far greater joy in computer programming and technical applications (typically a INTJ(P) field), than help people sort through their problems on a daily basis. The same goes for IQ tests. It seems generally true that an educated person would fare far better on one than an uneducated person. Only one person can decide what to do with their life...that individual. Let the individual decide what he/she may want to do with their life. Don't take me wrong...I find the questions asked by both to be a valuable introspective tool...but the focus should be on the questions asked...and not necessarily the results. --Jacob Bennett From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 22:24:44 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 08:54:44 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> On the contrary, ENTJ is one of those personalities that I've always found coupled with high intelligence, but usually in engineering/technical areas. My most brilliant friends are ENTJ and INTJ, often very hard people to work with because they are extremely particular and like to browbeat to get their way. They always think that brute force of reason is enough to persuade a listener, and if it doesn't work, just wash rinse repeat. Consequently, they only work well in groups when they have legitimate authority handed to them, otherwise they seem to be genius loners. (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) btw, I have a theory that the N/S dimension in kiersey types should be renamed to iNtelligent/Stoopid. Maybe that's a bit harsh, but I always find that dimension easy to predict in people I know. And NT, a rare combination in the world at large, is a predictor of high intelligence. But to be a natural leader, you need to be able to empathise with those you lead, understand their motivations. F often seems to be more useful than T, but best is a balance of F & T. Worst of all is an extreme in this dimension in either direction, imo. On 22/11/05, Morris Johnson wrote: > So IQ PLUS ENTJ turns an Einstein into a world leader. > > > On 11/21/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 11/21/05, Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO wrote: > > > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an embarrasement to > > > our IQ number since such lukewarm > > > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > > > > > > > > > > That's because high IQ too often leads to an unattractive combination of > laziness and arrogance. > > The world works on personality rather than IQ > > > > Dirk > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > > > -- > LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc. > Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. > Mission: To Preserve, Protect and Enhance Lifespan > Plant-based Natural-health Bio-product Bio-pharmaceuticals > http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan > http://www.4XtraLifespans.bravehost.com > megao at sasktel.net, arla_j at hotmail.com, mfj.eav at gmail.com > extropian.pharmer at gmail.com > > Extreme Life-Extension ..."The most dangerous idea on earth" > -Leon Kass , Bioethics Advisor to George Herbert Walker Bush, > June 2005 > > Radical Life-Extension Bioscience > + Total Information Awareness Globalized Info-science > = The 21st Century Paradigm ........ > Re-inventing the Human Condition with Quantum to Macro > Biomolecular-engineering > *"I will live each and every 50 years, one at a time, like the days of a > week".... Morris Johnson - June 2005* > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 30081 (http://nanowrimo.org) From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 21 22:26:02 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:26:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051121222603.30662.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Dirk Bruere wrote: > Just did a quick check - 133 > Seems I should be drummed out of Mensa... > What's the scale? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ gives a good overview. According to it, 1 in 50 - 2% - are above 132. So 133 would let you squeak in. That said, Mensa only requires that you prove your IQ when you enter. Age-related degradation of IQ after entry, by itself, does not remove one from Mensa at this time (although certain ill-advised actions that some might take as a result, might cause removal). From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 22:42:47 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:42:47 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051121222603.30662.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051121222603.30662.qmail@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/21/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Dirk Bruere wrote: > > Just did a quick check - 133 > > Seems I should be drummed out of Mensa... > > What's the scale? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ gives a good overview. According to > it, 1 in 50 - 2% - are above 132. So 133 would let you squeak in. > > That said, Mensa only requires that you prove your IQ when you enter. > Age-related degradation of IQ after entry, by itself, does not remove > one from Mensa at this time (although certain ill-advised actions that > some might take as a result, might cause removal). > Interesting. Seems my IQ hasn't dropped at all. I scored 149 when I did the test 28yrs ago, which was a scrapein. With some test practice I usually scraped into the upper 1% on subsequent IQ tests. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 21 23:06:42 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:06:42 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051121170401.03b40bc8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >If so, I reccomend we use something like the tickle classic IQ test: >http://web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/?test=uiqogt Uh huh. http://www.ratetheoffers.com/offer_profile.php?id=75 2005-05-28 [] "I did this offer for 3604free.com and received credit the same day! I had to pay $12.95 for the IQ Test, but that's not bad at all considering how fast they credit and the fact that you can cancel online by visiting the "My Account" page. Plus I got $25 from someone to sign up under them so I still profited on the deal. I'd definitely recommend doing this offer." 2005-04-13 [] "Very Easy. Take the IQ test, pay for it, wait for credit, and then cancel. You can cancel via the web, so it's a breeze. Certainly not free, but it was really easy." 2005-04-23 [] "I did this at night for flatscreens4free and was credited the next morning. Great offer if you want fast credit, but the IQ report was a waste of money. It's a ripoff if you don't end up getting your free gift." ho hum. Damien Broderick -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 13cd763.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1086 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 13cd7e0.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1086 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 13cd7ff.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1086 bytes Desc: not available URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 21 23:09:47 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:09:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] tickle Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051121170755.03b18b60@pop-server.satx.rr.com> oh, and fwiw: http://www.complaints.com/directory/2005/march/2/39.htm ======================= www.tickle.com Previously known as emode.com? I made the mistake of taking and paying for an IQ test a while back. I paid $15 or $20 for a detailed report and thought that was that. But from May 2004 through Feb 2005 my credit card has been billed for a subscription service that I never subscribed to, with total fees charged $129.50 This is a scam, nothing less. Now known as 'Tickle.com' this is a classic case of hidden charges. I bought and paid for the test results, nothing more. I called customer service and spoke with a person who was 'authorized to refund 3 months of subscription fees' so I have now been refunded $38.50, a reasonable start but certainly not a full correction to the problem. My problem has been 'escalated to the Finance Dept' and supposedly they will call me to follow up. If I am refunded all but the agreed-upon fee for the test results I will be satisfied. Anything less is unacceptable. Craig S ======================== Presumably Craig wasn't smart enough to do the cancel jig everyone else is talking about, but this is all a tad... dubious... no? Damien Broderick From joel.pitt at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 23:16:53 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:16:53 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] tickle In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051121170755.03b18b60@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20051121170755.03b18b60@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Uh, sorry for the reccomendation then. I purely said tickle because it was one I had done in the past and seemed reasonably detailed. I didn't pay for IQ test or score. I have no affiliation with them and I don't endorse people signing up to get "in depth reports". The funny thing is that I got an in depth report for free. Supposedly this was purely because in the top 0.n%. But I did have to register my *dis*interest in alot of spam sign ups. Joel On 11/22/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > oh, and fwiw: > > http://www.complaints.com/directory/2005/march/2/39.htm > > ======================= > > www.tickle.com > > Previously known as emode.com? > > I made the mistake of taking and paying for an IQ test a while back. I paid > $15 or $20 for a detailed report and thought that was that. But from May > 2004 through Feb 2005 my credit card has been billed for a subscription > service that I never subscribed to, with total fees charged $129.50 > > This is a scam, nothing less. Now known as 'Tickle.com' this is a classic > case of hidden charges. I bought and paid for the test results, nothing more. > > I called customer service and spoke with a person who was 'authorized to > refund 3 months of subscription fees' so I have now been refunded $38.50, a > reasonable start but certainly not a full correction to the problem. My > problem has been 'escalated to the Finance Dept' and supposedly they will > call me to follow up. > > If I am refunded all but the agreed-upon fee for the test results I will be > satisfied. Anything less is unacceptable. > > Craig S > ======================== > > Presumably Craig wasn't smart enough to do the cancel jig everyone else is > talking about, but this is all a tad... dubious... no? > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 21 23:58:46 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:58:46 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051121193712.GL2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <200511212358.jALNwkIo002492@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Hi Eugene > I don't believe in SA (or an effective infinity of similiar > production processes) for one reason: we don't have one shred of evidence > for it. I agree, but I also wanted to point out the evidence I accept against it. > > 1. Our consciousness is made up of qualia or phenomenal properties. > While > > Did you know that phlogiston has negative weight? > http://www.jimloy.com/physics/phlogstn.htm Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. I think qualia or phenomenal properties of nature which I think the brain uses to represent conscious information will be discovered some time during the next 10 years. This will eventually lead to what will be called "effing" or communication of such qualities between minds. (as in oh THAT'S what salt tastes like.) I predict this will turn out to be by far the most significant scientific discovery to date. And I predict people that believe phenomenal properties don't exist will be kicking themselves for centuries after this for being so stupid and missing what should be so blatantly obvious. If you are so sure that phenomenal qualities will be nothing more than what phlogiston was - would you care to place a wager that this discovery of qualia will not take place some time in the next 10 years? > > > these can be simulated or modeled by other abstract phenomena - the > > simulations isn't like the real thing. We could be brains in vats, and > the > > Ich kann, so zu sagen, mein chemisches Wasser nicht halten und muss ihnen > sagen, > dich Harnstoff machen kann, ohne dazu die Niere oder ueberhaupt ein Thier, > sey > es Mensch oder Hund, noethig zu haben. > Sorry, I don't understand German. I tried an auto translator but it still didn't make much sense. I wish I knew what you were saying here. > Allright, just remove consciousness, and feel the simulation with zombies. > Torture them all you will, they won't feel a thing. Yes, this is exactly what I am talking about when I say they can simulate it without the immoral suffering of phenomenal suffering. Again, since we do experience phenomenal suffering - this is evidence against us being a simulation since they would just do it without qualia. Brent Allsop From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 01:18:22 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:18:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511212358.jALNwkIo002492@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511212358.jALNwkIo002492@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:58:46 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > I think qualia or phenomenal properties of nature which I think the brain > uses to represent conscious information will be discovered some time > during the next 10 years. This will eventually lead to what will be > called > "effing" or communication of such qualities between minds. (as in oh > THAT'S what salt tastes like.) I predict this will turn out to be by > far the most significant scientific discovery to date. That's an interesting point of view, Brent. How do you suppose this will happen? Recently I read Chalmer's book on the subject of consciousness, (The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195117891/103-0973791-2204613?v=glance&n=283155). I was left with the impression that the 'hard problem of consciousness' will be probably one of the last important questions of science. Solving it in 10 years would be quite an accomplishment. I like the argument about Mary, the hypothetical neuroscientist who knows everything that can possibly be known about neuroscience and the perception color, but who lives in a black and white world. Does she really know "what it is like" to see the color red? i.e., does she know about qualia? The answer seems to be no. How can empirical science ever grasp qualia? -gts From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 01:49:37 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:49:37 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] tickle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: If you have an above average IQ (estimate) and wish to take a test then try contacting Mensa for the SELF-TEST version. They have one you can take (cheaply) and time/proctor yourself. (No point in cheating since they still make you take the private version) but it lets you know if it's worth attending a proctored exam. (The is really old info, since my daughter was in her teens the last time I was involved with this. She and my wife took the exams.) Mensa has also been taking pretty much ANY exam that can be normed to show the "top 2% of the population" -- even SAT, and most any 'real' IQ exam that is given under controlled/proctored conditions. -- Herb Martin > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Joel Peter William Pitt > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 3:17 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] tickle > > Uh, sorry for the reccomendation then. > > I purely said tickle because it was one I had done in the past and > seemed reasonably detailed. I didn't pay for IQ test or score. I have > no affiliation with them and I don't endorse people signing up to get > "in depth reports". > > The funny thing is that I got an in depth report for free. Supposedly > this was purely because in the top 0.n%. But I did have to register my > *dis*interest in alot of spam sign ups. > > Joel > > On 11/22/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > > oh, and fwiw: > > > > http://www.complaints.com/directory/2005/march/2/39.htm > > > > ======================= > > > > www.tickle.com > > > > Previously known as emode.com? > > > > I made the mistake of taking and paying for an IQ test a > while back. I paid > > $15 or $20 for a detailed report and thought that was that. > But from May > > 2004 through Feb 2005 my credit card has been billed for a > subscription > > service that I never subscribed to, with total fees charged $129.50 > > > > This is a scam, nothing less. Now known as 'Tickle.com' > this is a classic > > case of hidden charges. I bought and paid for the test > results, nothing more. > > > > I called customer service and spoke with a person who was > 'authorized to > > refund 3 months of subscription fees' so I have now been > refunded $38.50, a > > reasonable start but certainly not a full correction to the > problem. My > > problem has been 'escalated to the Finance Dept' and > supposedly they will > > call me to follow up. > > > > If I am refunded all but the agreed-upon fee for the test > results I will be > > satisfied. Anything less is unacceptable. > > > > Craig S > > ======================== > > > > Presumably Craig wasn't smart enough to do the cancel jig > everyone else is > > talking about, but this is all a tad... dubious... no? > > > > Damien Broderick > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 02:00:07 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:00:07 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > On the contrary, ENTJ is one of those personalities that I've always > found coupled with high intelligence, but usually in > engineering/technical areas. My most brilliant friends are ENTJ and > INTJ, often very hard people to work with because they are extremely > particular and like to browbeat to get their way. They always think > that brute force of reason is enough to persuade a listener, and if it > doesn't work, just wash rinse repeat. Consequently, they only work > well in groups when they have legitimate authority handed to them, > otherwise they seem to be genius loners. > > (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) Although these personality types don't really seem to have any rigorous scientific validity behind them (and they are proprietary/copyrighted so it's difficult to get the real story) you estimate jibes with many others that I have met in various "psychology classes" where such tests were given. The off-scale intelligent tend to be able to CHANGE their personality type to fit the context, audience, or problem also. This is also true of the NLP modalities: visual, auditory, kinesthetic: A really good understanding will include a representation in two or more modalities and preferably all three (and some variations on the themes.) Those who would really know something know it from many perspectives and using various methods. (If you care, I make my living by delivering accelerated training that allows even those who don't think of themselves as particularly smart to learn about as much each day as they would with anyone else in a week.) -- Herb Martin HerbM at LearnQuick.Com http://LearnQuick.Com 512 388 7339 -or- 1 800 MCSE PRO Accelerated MCSE in a Week Seminars From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 02:15:07 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:15:07 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Message-ID: > Worse than that, many of can think of ourselves as an > embarrasement to > our IQ number since such lukewarm > IQ's as Bush can pass on by and rule the roost... etc. > Actually, both Bush and Kerry had mildly warm (not lukewarm nor hot) IQs and even similar grades at Yale (Bush edged out Kerry by not enough to matter.) Few candidates for President have likely had off-scale IQs. It's requires too many years of boring politics to get there. -- Herb Martin From joel.pitt at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 02:24:51 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:24:51 +1300 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Message-ID: On 11/22/05, Herb Martin wrote: > Actually, both Bush and Kerry had mildly warm (not lukewarm > nor hot) IQs and even similar grades at Yale (Bush edged > out Kerry by not enough to matter.) > > Few candidates for President have likely had off-scale IQs. > > It's requires too many years of boring politics to get there. Which brings up the quote whose source I'm unsure of: "Those that actually want to lead are the least suited to." -Joel From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 22 02:40:03 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:40:03 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051121213505.08ad7bc8@unreasonable.com> Herb Martin wrote: >Actually, both Bush and Kerry had mildly warm (not lukewarm >nor hot) IQs and even similar grades at Yale (Bush edged >out Kerry by not enough to matter.) > >Few candidates for President have likely had off-scale IQs. Although John Sununu, PhD in chemical engineering, NH Governor, and later Bush-1 Chief of Staff, had one of the highest recorded scores on the Langdon IQ test that appeared in Omni. Kevin is a diligent psychometrician; Sununu's score is at the 1 in a million mark, around an IQ of 177. On the other hand, he was a lousy Chief of Staff. -- David. From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 22 03:32:40 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:32:40 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <4EC8825C-CD01-46BD-ACE9-4FF8E124E1E8@mac.com> Message-ID: <200511220332.jAM3WVe11870@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... > > I found Mensa disappointing. With a few wonderful exceptions the > meetings were mostly about finding someone smart to date and playing > countless board games. The vast majority of the people seemed to be > terribly ineffectual in life and be doing little with their brains > except for passionate time consuming involvement in some very arcane > and useless avocation. > > - samantha Me too. Their test isn't that hard to pass, especially if you practice. I wouldn't call it a real IQ test, or if so they aren't worth much for anything other than screening membership to Mensa. I found it much like a lonely hearts club. I was a newlywed at the time, so it wasn't much interest to me. spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 22 03:34:08 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:34:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Accelerated learning (was RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051122033408.62102.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Herb Martin wrote: > The off-scale intelligent tend to be able to CHANGE > their personality type to fit the context, audience, > or problem also. Actors can do this too, to play the many different roles they get. It is a skill that one can learn. > This is also true of the NLP modalities: visual, > auditory, kinesthetic: A really good understanding > will include a representation in two or more modalities > and preferably all three (and some variations on the > themes.) > > Those who would really know something know it from > many perspectives and using various methods. While these various perspectives and methods can in theory be learned in advance, I wonder...could it be the case that this rarely happens while "book learning" (or any other sort of learning short of actually doing the activity in question), and that almost always these alternate modes and methods are only encountered when the skill is actually applied (often in not-quite-textbook cases, as is the nature of real situations), which is then the main cause for why "book learning" can often be (and is) justifiably dismissed as not really "knowing" a skill set or field of knowledge? If this is the case, then would it remedy this lack of value of "book learning", at least to a significant degree, to incorporate those different modes and methods, rather than avoiding them and concentrating on only the simplest mode and method to optimize for cost (as often naturally happens in any prepared activity)? Sorry for the run-on sentences. I hope at least the idea was clear enough. ^_^; > (If you care, I make my living by delivering accelerated > training that allows even those who don't think of > themselves as particularly smart to learn about as much > each day as they would with anyone else in a week.) Checking your Web site - http://LearnQuick.com/ - you seem to focus on low-level technical skills. I wonder if a similar approach could be used on a grander scale, say to compress multi-year college physics courses into a single year? Or how about teaching the usual K-12 cirriculum in only ten years, to even average children? (Not necessarily to those of significantly lower than average ability, but those are already recognized as "special needs" and in many places have existing programs to serve them.) While browsing the thread Amara pointed out about women scientists and their biological clocks, I saw that a major problem for said scientists (and other women in degree-required careers) is that the years required for the K-12-plus-college-plus-graduate-degree track means they don't get to really do their own thing (like, say, take time off for a kid) until they are old enough to face problems getting pregnant and having children. (Men don't have to worry about childbirth, and their fertility falls off later, but neither is the average male at their prime in this regard at 40.) Longevity will hopefully alleviate this problem eventually, but in the mean time, might it help society to compress the education that currently spans about two decades into less time? (Family-wise, or simply by getting trained people into the workforce faster, so that people have more productive years. Either by today's mortal perspective, or even if most everyone beyond a certain age today will live to see practical immortality - an extra year is an extra year, and perhaps the extra brains could help bring the Singularity faster.) From megao at sasktel.net Tue Nov 22 03:56:12 2005 From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc/ MFJ-CTO) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:56:12 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051121213505.08ad7bc8@unreasonable.com> References: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20051121213505.08ad7bc8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <438296DC.2050304@sasktel.net> I was once told that a good leader surrounds him/her self with people brighter than him/her self who are extremely proficient in specific areas and manages the talent to implement the broader plans that leadership strategically develops and mentors/oversees/tweaks to completion. I was again told at project management course I took this last week that the "sponsor" can be a generalist and just micromanage to the level at which all the hazards/deviations can be noted and remedied within the pre-determined constraints of the scope of the longer/broader overall plan. I am an ENTJ and only after taking a leadership training program in 1998-99 did I get properly tested, and learn how to make the best uses of all those blessed curses that go with the package. I only wish I had taken this kind of training 20 years earlier. Morris David Lubkin wrote: > Herb Martin wrote: > >> Actually, both Bush and Kerry had mildly warm (not lukewarm >> nor hot) IQs and even similar grades at Yale (Bush edged >> out Kerry by not enough to matter.) >> >> Few candidates for President have likely had off-scale IQs. > > > Although John Sununu, PhD in chemical engineering, NH Governor, and > later Bush-1 Chief of Staff, had one of the highest recorded scores on > the Langdon IQ test that appeared in Omni. Kevin is a diligent > psychometrician; Sununu's score is at the 1 in a million mark, around > an IQ of 177. > > On the other hand, he was a lousy Chief of Staff. > > > From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 22 04:08:22 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:08:22 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> > Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may > bias the distribution - and please be honest! Wooohooo! 144. But I have taken this test before I vaguely recall, and also I had a Mensa daily desk calendar a couple years ago and so I got practice on these kinds of questions. Probably should knock off about 10 points for that. I qualified for Mensa on both SAT and GRE scores, but I had a slim margin on both, so if I take the lowest qualifying score for Mensa, which is about 2.2 sigma or about 133, then I probably should be listed as a 134, which is pretty consistent with other tests I have taken. But I probably should knock off at least a couple points for age, so 132 and another point for getting lucky on a couple of those tickle questions so put me down for 131. spike From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 04:08:44 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:08:44 -0800 Subject: Accelerated learning (was RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat]Seven cents an hour?) In-Reply-To: <20051122033408.62102.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > --- Herb Martin wrote: > > The off-scale intelligent tend to be able to CHANGE > > their personality type to fit the context, audience, > > or problem also. > > Actors can do this too, to play the many different roles they get. It > is a skill that one can learn. Yes, but seldom does anyone state it so clearly. It is a definite skill, and yes it is both related to acting and teachable/learnable through repeatable methods. Modeling is the general term for the primary technique but one can just consciously apply many of the techniques of acting to implement such methods with great success. > > This is also true of the NLP modalities: visual, > > auditory, kinesthetic: A really good understanding > > will include a representation in two or more modalities > > and preferably all three (and some variations on the > > themes.) > > > > Those who would really know something know it from > > many perspectives and using various methods. > > While these various perspectives and methods can in theory be learned > in advance, I wonder...could it be the case that this rarely happens > while "book learning" (or any other sort of learning short of actually > doing the activity in question), and that almost always these > alternate No, except perhaps if you mean 'rarely' in pure statistical terms including those who don't understand such methods. Yes, it is rare, but among those who know and teach the techniques the ability to model consciously even from books, lectures, or other supposedly passive learning makes such almost as effective as doing -- in fact, when the time spent is considered such methods may be more effective since they involve much less time as long as your "expert" (who you model) is able to explain the methods used OR you (the learning) are fully versed in the expert systems techniques for extracting the key elements the expert uses. > modes and methods are only encountered when the skill is actually > applied (often in not-quite-textbook cases, as is the nature of real > situations), which is then the main cause for why "book learning" can > often be (and is) justifiably dismissed as not really > "knowing" a skill > set or field of knowledge? Indeed, there are some things that require the actual building of 'muscles' (a la weight lifting) or the development of new neural networks (speed reading) but even then proper application of modeling techniques leads to much faster skill acquisition. Oddly enough, learning speed reading is almost precisely a direct analogy of weight lifting -- I use this analogy explicitly when teaching speed reading. It is almost literally the same rather than a mere analogy. > If this is the case, then would it remedy this lack of value of "book > learning", at least to a significant degree, to incorporate those > different modes and methods, rather than avoiding them and > concentrating on only the simplest mode and method to > optimize for cost > (as often naturally happens in any prepared activity)? Not sure what you mean here, but if you intend to apply the methods you already seem to understand to the task of learning from books and listening then yes, it works -- and almost as well in many cases. > Sorry for the run-on sentences. I hope at least the idea was clear > enough. ^_^; > > > (If you care, I make my living by delivering accelerated > > training that allows even those who don't think of > > themselves as particularly smart to learn about as much > > each day as they would with anyone else in a week.) > > Checking your Web site - http://LearnQuick.com/ - you seem to focus on > low-level technical skills. Depends on what you mean by "low level" -- while teaching much memorization and technical details, I slip in a deep course in troubleshooting, accelerated learning itself, and problem solving in general. I do this both to meet my primary promise directly (success in the technical details) but also to make sure my students are generally successful and respected (on average) so that they become my sales force and best advertisement. > I wonder if a similar approach could be > used on a grander scale, say to compress multi-year college physics > courses into a single year? Or how about teaching the usual K-12 Yes. > cirriculum in only ten years, to even average children? (Not Easily if the teachers were FIRST properly trained and the curriculum were developed. One of the fellows who taught me much of what I know about modeling and teaching with these methods, has suggested building superior curriculum materials using producers such as Steven Spielberg and the be comedy writers and artists to produce truly compelling learning materials -- then hiring people who GENUINELY enjoy hanging out with young people to mediate the classes and coach them through the exercises. He seriously intends an effort comparable to "a man on the moon within 10 years" -- we really don't need to have the curriculum change every 5-10 years if we build really great materials that are compelling, funny, entertaining and clearly indicate the required knowledge. > necessarily to those of significantly lower than average ability, but > those are already recognized as "special needs" and in many > places have > existing programs to serve them.) Glen Doman and the folks at the "Institute for Human Potential" (I think that is correct) were consistently able to help even brain damaged children, not just to 'catch up' but many times to excel. -- Herb From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 22 04:21:40 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:21:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051121193712.GL2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <200511220421.jAM4LVe17149@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl ... > > Ich kann, so zu sagen, mein chemisches Wasser nicht halten und muss ihnen > sagen, dich Harnstoff machen kann, ohne dazu die Niere oder ueberhaupt ein > Thier, sey es Mensch oder Hund, noethig zu haben. > ??? One can make urine, regardless if one is a human or a dog, or even without kidneys, in the lab??? Do translate Gene. > Computers can't play chess. They can only simulate playing chess... Oh my but they are making a terrific simulation this week. They were whooping some carbon-based ass: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2747 Computers beat three former FIDE world champions, wooohooo! {8-] It made it look like the computers were playing the actual chess and the humans were simulating it. Today's result was two draws and a win for one of the humans, so this match aint over. Go silicon! spike From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 22 04:39:45 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:39:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <200511220421.jAM4LVe17149@tick.javien.com> References: <20051121193712.GL2249@leitl.org> <200511220421.jAM4LVe17149@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511212039w76657adm4cd40a3a174209c7@mail.gmail.com> On 11/21/05, spike wrote: > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl > ... > > > > Ich kann, so zu sagen, mein chemisches Wasser nicht halten und muss ihnen > > sagen, dich Harnstoff machen kann, ohne dazu die Niere oder ueberhaupt ein > > Thier, sey es Mensch oder Hund, noethig zu haben. > > > > ??? One can make urine, regardless if one is a human or a > dog, or even without kidneys, in the lab??? > Wohler wrote triumphantly to Berzelius: "I must tell you that I can make urea without the use of kidneys, either man or dog. Ammonium cyanate is urea." Of course, it wasn't "real" ammonium cyanate. To my quotes collection I've also added "Computers can't play chess. They can only simulate playing chess." - Eugen Leitl along with my favorite "Experiences only look special from the inside of the system." - Eugen Leitl From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 05:35:52 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:35:52 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:08:22 -0500, spike wrote: > Wooohooo! 144. Interesting that you are probably among the most intelligent here, yet also among the most likely to ask questions and among the least likely to pontificate. (Ja, I've been away for a couple of years but I have not forgotten the dynamics of this online community). Kudos to you, Mr. Woo Hoo. ;-) -gts (habitual pontificator) From mbb386 at main.nc.us Tue Nov 22 05:59:48 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:59:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <51852.72.236.103.48.1132639188.squirrel@main.nc.us> >> Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may >> bias the distribution - and please be honest! > Surprised to find 133 as my score - so many folks here are plainly much smarter than I am! Do you think this test is "real"? Does anyone get a low score? Just wondering if it were a fake, and skewed to make people want to "join" the Tickle site. Regards, MB From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 22 06:18:25 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:18:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Accelerated learning (was RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat]Seven cents an hour?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051122061825.95757.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Herb Martin wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > --- Herb Martin wrote: > > > This is also true of the NLP modalities: visual, > > > auditory, kinesthetic: A really good understanding > > > will include a representation in two or more modalities > > > and preferably all three (and some variations on the > > > themes.) > > > > > > Those who would really know something know it from > > > many perspectives and using various methods. > > > > While these various perspectives and methods can in theory be > learned > > in advance, I wonder...could it be the case that this rarely > happens > > while "book learning" (or any other sort of learning short of > actually > > doing the activity in question), and that almost always these > > alternate > > No, except perhaps if you mean 'rarely' in pure statistical > terms including those who don't understand such methods. > > Yes, it is rare, but among those who know and teach the > techniques the ability to model consciously even from > books, lectures, or other supposedly passive learning > makes such almost as effective as doing I meant "rarely" as across all of human experience, most definitely including the vast majority of teachers who have never heard of (or at least do not employ anything resembling) your techniques - despite constant teacher training (at least in the US). > > If this is the case, then would it remedy this lack of value of > "book > > learning", at least to a significant degree, to incorporate those > > different modes and methods, rather than avoiding them and > > concentrating on only the simplest mode and method to > > optimize for cost > > (as often naturally happens in any prepared activity)? > > Not sure what you mean here, but if you intend to apply the > methods you already seem to understand to the task of learning > from books and listening then yes, it works -- and almost as > well in many cases. Almost as well as...? > > Checking your Web site - http://LearnQuick.com/ - you seem to focus > on > > low-level technical skills. > > Depends on what you mean by "low level" -- while teaching > much memorization and technical details, I slip in a deep > course in troubleshooting, accelerated learning itself, and > problem solving in general. >From your Web site: "Accelerated MCSE in a Week Windows 2003 Seminars" You apparently teach how to pass the MSCE exam, as opposed to how to actually be a sysadmin or a programmer, or an overall theory of computer science. That kind of "low level". > One of the fellows who taught me much of what I know about modeling > and teaching with these methods, has suggested building superior > curriculum materials using producers such as Steven Spielberg and > the be comedy writers and artists to produce truly compelling > learning materials -- then hiring people who GENUINELY enjoy > hanging out with young people to mediate the classes and coach > them through the exercises. > > He seriously intends an effort comparable to "a man on the moon > within 10 years" -- we really don't need to have the curriculum > change every 5-10 years if we build really great materials that > are compelling, funny, entertaining and clearly indicate the > required knowledge. If only we could get the funding to implement such. There are so many proposals for reforming education, all with their own data proving they are the One True Way - and so little funding for education period, as people prefer to invest in shorter-term or more controllable payoffs. From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 22 07:07:03 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:07:03 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511220707.jAM778e31518@tick.javien.com> You are too kind gts, but I cannot accept your assessment on being among the most intelligent here. I greatly benefited from friends giving me Mensa calendars, knowing that I like puzzles. That helps *a lot* on these kinds of things, helps on SATs and GREs to just like doing puzzles. Regarding not pontificating, if I knew the answers I would be the first to pontificate. Damn they are complicated today. But IQ test puzzles are easy and fun. spike (aka mr. woo hoo. I like that. {8^D) > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of gts > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:36 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:08:22 -0500, spike wrote: > > > Wooohooo! 144. > > Interesting that you are probably among the most intelligent here, yet > also among the most likely to ask questions and among the least likely to > pontificate. (Ja, I've been away for a couple of years but I have not > forgotten the dynamics of this online community). Kudos to you, Mr. Woo > Hoo. ;-) > > -gts (habitual pontificator) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 07:13:43 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:13:43 -0800 Subject: Accelerated learning (was RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re:[extropy-chat]Seven cents an hour?) In-Reply-To: <20051122061825.95757.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > >From your Web site: > > "Accelerated MCSE in a Week > Windows 2003 Seminars" > > You apparently teach how to pass the MSCE exam, as opposed to how to > actually be a sysadmin or a programmer, or an overall theory of > computer science. That kind of "low level". > Appearances are not always what they seem; what I actually do is teach people how to be MUCH better at designing solutions, implementing those solutions, and troubleshooting them when someone messes them up -- designing & administering systems. We use the exams to encourage and even force our students to pay attention and then to prove that they have actually learned the basis of the system. This isn't really a thread about me, but my students recognize that they are not learning to just pass a test but rather use their prior experience (we only take network professionals) to rapidly become more skilled with the products while also being able to pass exams. Most are quite astonished to discover that while they may have arrived with the intention to 'just pass a test' they are actually learning the equivalent of 6-10 weeks of outstanding training (by their normal standards) in only 5 days. > > He seriously intends an effort comparable to "a man on the moon > > within 10 years" -- we really don't need to have the curriculum > > change every 5-10 years if we build really great materials that > > are compelling, funny, entertaining and clearly indicate the > > required knowledge. > > If only we could get the funding to implement such. There are so many > proposals for reforming education, all with their own data > proving they > are the One True Way - and so little funding for education period, as > people prefer to invest in shorter-term or more controllable payoffs. Right. This is the sense in which is proposal isn't really serious because current politic reality is not going to allow it to be implemented. We have enough trouble just requiring that schools PROVE that students are learning by testing. Were we to test students going into each grade and then at the end, then PAY teachers more for successful students (based on their baseline) AND we were to create exams that measure what we wish them to learn the education system would transform within just a few years. Especially if any teach who could not perform using such objective measures was asked to find another career after a few years of failure. In a perfect world, teachers would be paid like rock or sports stars, but those who cannot teach would be ruthlessly CUT from the team. -- Herb Martin > > One of the fellows who taught me much of what I know about modeling > > and teaching with these methods, has suggested building superior > > curriculum materials using producers such as Steven Spielberg and > > the be comedy writers and artists to produce truly compelling > > learning materials -- then hiring people who GENUINELY enjoy > > hanging out with young people to mediate the classes and coach > > them through the exercises. > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 22 08:23:52 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:23:52 +0100 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com><6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com><025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net><61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> From: "Emlyn" > (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) What does it mean ENTP? And ENTJ? s. PS: My score, in any IQ test, would be negative, I suppose. Since I need a lot of time to answer to every single question. Usually I get many different, but (imo) also consistent answers to every question. So I have to sort these answers. Which is the best, the more likely? Difficult task. It takes a lot of time. A sort of undecidability. I was tested long time ago, as a student, with the rest of the (physics) class. It was a very long test. About 2 hours time. But they did not publish the scores. So we all thought those scores were low. From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 22 08:35:27 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 02:35:27 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:23 AM 11/22/2005 +0100, Serafino wrote: >From: "Emlyn" > > (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) > >What does it mean ENTP? And ENTJ? One of 16 temperament typological categories, as defined by the Myers-Briggs instrument. Look at http://www.keirsey.com/ or maybe http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm where you can do a test, or used to be able to. It's surprisingly apt. (But then one is putting the data in and getting the same stuff back, resorted and compressed.) Damien Broderick From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 22 08:46:08 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:46:08 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: > What does it mean ENTP? And ENTJ? > s. > > PS: My score, in any IQ test, would be > negative, I suppose. Since I need > a lot of time to answer to every single > question. Usually I get many different, > but (imo) also consistent answers to every > question. So I have to sort these answers. > Which is the best, the more likely? > Difficult task. It takes a lot of time. > A sort of undecidability. > I was tested long time ago, as a student, > with the rest of the (physics) class. > It was a very long test. About 2 hours time. > But they did not publish the scores. > So we all thought those scores were low. Some IQ tests are given in whole, or in part, by a trained psychology or psychometrician to eliminate, or at least ameliorate, problems with reading, and such multiple choice exams. The first test I took, was an individually administered Stanford-Binet given entirely by a psychometrician. This is very common with young children -- my daughter was tested at age 4 (because the state in which we lived had programs which required the state offer assistance with her education if she was identified as gifted) It was given partly by such a profession, and (IIRC) partly in standardized form. In reference to this thread in general: What do each of you DO to increase you IQ score, or if you prefer your ability to learn, remember, reason, judge, plan, and perform other mental task normally claimed to be measured by IQ? Do you take any actions? What are they? Do they work? Which work best? Or worst if they are touted as useful? Speed-reading, mnemonics, NLP (especially modeling), study of math (even in middle age), science and continued efforts to learn to program better (even though I have long been a professional programmer) are SOME of the things that I regularly do and practice. Lately, I have been applying these techniques in learning Spanish and Arabic, and developing a personal system for learning languages in general. Over the last year I made more progress in each of these languages than I had made in 4 years of high school French or two years living in Germany (and actively studying the language but while living among Americans.) My German was "useful" but within 3 months this method I developed had me reading entire novels completely in Spanish (with no prior study): all of the Harry Potter novels, and then "The DaVinci Code". By the end, I was reading nearly as well as my English "slow reading" ability (i.e., non-Speed Reading) but with the need to look up a few more words in the dictionary. Keep learning. Keep growing. This is a large part of the dream of transhumanity; to be able to augment our wetware with hardware, software, and other intelligence prosthetics. -- Herb Martin From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 22 09:47:17 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:47:17 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <200511212358.jALNwkIo002492@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <20051121193712.GL2249@leitl.org> <200511212358.jALNwkIo002492@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <20051122094717.GI2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:58:46PM -0700, Brent Allsop wrote: > I think qualia or phenomenal properties of nature which I think the brain > uses to represent conscious information will be discovered some time during We're already seeing and measuring qualia all the time. It's an emergent property of the physical system between our ears. It is an entirely unremarkable property, unless it introspects. > the next 10 years. This will eventually lead to what will be called > "effing" or communication of such qualities between minds. (as in oh THAT'S Are you familiar with open-brain electrostimulation? Why do you think does common juice make all these qualia sing and dance? > what salt tastes like.) I predict this will turn out to be by far the most Sure you can build translators for individual internal representation, and beam those across the network. How do qualia factor in? We already know how to do that, what is missing is the technology to instrument your noggin at sufficient detail and the numeric crunch to sort through all the signals in realtime. We might get such technology in the course of the next 20-30 years. > significant scientific discovery to date. And I predict people that believe > phenomenal properties don't exist will be kicking themselves for centuries > after this for being so stupid and missing what should be so blatantly > obvious. If you'd give me a measurement procedure for qualia not requiring a person you'd have a point. > If you are so sure that phenomenal qualities will be nothing more than what > phlogiston was - would you care to place a wager that this discovery of > qualia will not take place some time in the next 10 years? Yes. Assuming, your qualia is everybody's qualia. (I'm having trouble to understand, because qualia means absolutely nothing to me. Just as soul, vis vitalis, or phlogiston). > Sorry, I don't understand German. I tried an auto translator but it still > didn't make much sense. I wish I knew what you were saying here. It's a verbatim (mangled) quote from a letter Woehler wrote to Berzelius http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Woehler ... W?hler is regarded as a pioneer in organic chemistry as a result of his (accidental) synthesizing urea in the W?hler synthesis in 1828. Until 1828, it was believed that organic substances could only be formed under the influence of the vital force in the bodies of animals and plants. W?hler proved by the artificial preparation of urea from inorganic materials that this view was false. Urea synthesis was integral for biochemistry because it showed that a compound known to be produced only by biological organisms could be produced in a laboratory, under controlled conditions, from inanimate matter. This in vitro synthesis of organic matter disproved the common theory (vitalism) about the vis vitalis, a transcendent "life force" needed for producing organic compounds. ... > > Allright, just remove consciousness, and feel the simulation with zombies. > > Torture them all you will, they won't feel a thing. > > Yes, this is exactly what I am talking about when I say they can simulate it > without the immoral suffering of phenomenal suffering. Again, since we do Sorry, there's no way to way to remove the suffering from an accurate model. Zombies are strictly ficticious. > experience phenomenal suffering - this is evidence against us being a > simulation since they would just do it without qualia. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From isthatyoujack at icqmail.com Tue Nov 22 11:58:20 2005 From: isthatyoujack at icqmail.com (Jack Parkinson) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:58:20 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Internet: a commie, socialist conspiracy! Message-ID: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> Some interesting observations and opinions from Slate magazine. In a world ruled by profit-focused business - the Internet could never have arisen... Full story see: http://www.slate.com/id/2130798 Two short snips: "This month, SAP's Shai Agassi referred to open-source software as "intellectual property socialism." In January, Bill Gates suggested that free-software developers are communists. A few years earlier, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer called the open-source operating system Linux "a cancer." Considering what these guys say in public, I wonder what dark words they utter in private-that al-Qaida uses open-source software to plot terrorist attacks?" "The Web owes its existence to open source: Both the first text browser and the first graphical browser, Mosaic, were open-source projects. About 70 percent of the world's Web servers run on Apache, which powers some 50 million sites. If it weren't for free open-source software, companies like Amazon, Google, and Yahoo!-all of which run Linux-might never have got off the ground. Google, for example, uses an estimated 170,000 servers to power its search engines. If it used Microsoft Web server software-around $500 per computer in licensing fees-that would create an annual bill of about $85 million. That wouldn't put a dent in Google's budget today, but Sergey Brin and Larry Page never would have been able to start their company if they had had to pay those kinds of fees up front." Jack Parkinson From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 22 12:28:14 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:28:14 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Internet: a commie, socialist conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> References: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> Message-ID: <20051122122814.GT2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:58:20PM +0800, Jack Parkinson wrote: > "This month, SAP's Shai Agassi referred to open-source software as > "intellectual property socialism." In January, Bill Gates suggested that Yes, they're stealing *YOUR* intellectual property (I presume, by advanced neurosurgery) so that you don't have it anymore. Then, ARRRR Matey!, they redistribute it to evil (not at all like Jack Sparrow) pirates. > free-software developers are communists. A few years earlier, Microsoft CEO > Steve Ballmer called the open-source operating system Linux "a cancer." Open sores cancer, man! Time for some serious chemo. Maybe that's why Ballmer's head is like a billiard ball. > Considering what these guys say in public, I wonder what dark words they > utter in private-that al-Qaida uses open-source software to plot terrorist > attacks?" > > "The Web owes its existence to open source: Both the first text browser and > the first graphical browser, Mosaic, were open-source projects. About 70 > percent of the world's Web servers run on Apache, which powers some 50 > million sites. If it weren't for free open-source software, companies like > Amazon, Google, and Yahoo!-all of which run Linux-might never have got off Not only Linux, but Perl and Python, and Apache, and a gadzillion of others. And we can safely omit the "might". It would never have happened, period. > the ground. Google, for example, uses an estimated 170,000 servers to power > its search engines. If it used Microsoft Web server software-around $500 > per computer in licensing fees-that would create an annual bill of about > $85 million. That wouldn't put a dent in Google's budget today, but Sergey > Brin and Larry Page never would have been able to start their company if > they had had to pay those kinds of fees up front." Nevermind that Redmond doesn't make server operating systems. They only wish they could. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Wed Nov 23 13:25:59 2005 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (david) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:25:59 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: IQ distribution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43846DE7.1010501@optusnet.com.au> Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: >Sorry for posting the following twice, but I forgot to specify a new >subject and thought it'd worth starting a new thread for this. > >---- >Would anybody be interested in finding out just what the IQ >distribution of ExI chat is? > >If so, I reccomend we use something like the tickle classic IQ test: >http://web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/?test=uiqogt > >To prevent this from turning into a pissing contest and decrease the >likelihood of people lieing, I volunteer to collect peoples IQ scores >via email and make some nice graphs of the distribution. Once done >I'll destroy the emails with your IQs and promptly forget the actual >values. > >Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may >bias the distribution - and please be honest! > >Cheers, >Joel >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > It rates me as 140, but I agree with Spike that its just a puzzle test. -deimtee From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 13:54:55 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:24:55 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511220554j6bc213afy@mail.gmail.com> On 22/11/05, scerir wrote: > From: "Emlyn" > > (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) > > What does it mean ENTP? And ENTJ? > s. > http://www.keirsey.com/ pop-psychology nonsense for the most part, but it's the fun stuff :-) -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 14:01:31 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:31:31 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> On 22/11/05, spike wrote: > > Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences may > > bias the distribution - and please be honest! > > > Wooohooo! 144. Snap! 144. But don't go taking points off yourself Spike, come on! I'm keeping all of mine, that's for sure. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 14:02:52 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:32:52 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> On 22/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:23 AM 11/22/2005 +0100, Serafino wrote: > >From: "Emlyn" > > > (Disclaimer - I'm an ENTP) > > > >What does it mean ENTP? And ENTJ? > > One of 16 temperament typological categories, as defined by the > Myers-Briggs instrument. Look at > > http://www.keirsey.com/ > > or maybe > > http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm > > where you can do a test, or used to be able to. It's surprisingly apt. (But > then one is putting the data in and getting the same stuff back, resorted > and compressed.) > > Damien Broderick > I would guess that you are an INTJ, Damien. Close? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 22 15:49:13 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:49:13 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> > > Wooohooo! 144. > > Snap! 144. > > But don't go taking points off yourself Spike, come on! I'm keeping > all of mine, that's for sure. > > -- > Emlyn Emlyn you are younger than I. We are not getting smarter with age, that we can be sure. The other tests keep insisting early 130s. spike From pharos at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 16:24:12 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:24:12 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> References: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > Emlyn you are younger than I. We are not getting smarter with > age, that we can be sure. The other tests keep insisting > early 130s. spike > Yea, but you're supposed to get more sense as you get older, because you make the 'Never again!' mistakes when you are young. After you've had fifty years of making mistakes, you must know not to drink the shampoo. On the other hand, I always say that the sign of being an expert in any field, is that you make a much better class of mistake than the rank amateurs. :) BillK From kevin at kevinfreels.com Tue Nov 22 17:17:59 2005 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevinfreels.com) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:17:59 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Friend in need - son paralyzed from the neck down Message-ID: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> I have a fried who's 13 yr old son was just paralyzed from the neck down as a result of a tornado. The son is having serious problems dealing with it and I would like to extend him some hope and help. I would like to ask for your assistance with one or more of the following: 1:) I would like specific examples of people with similar disabilities making their contributions to society. Stephen Hawking for example. A short narrative of a specific person you know with some links to further information would be nice. I would like him to understand that he is not alone and that legs are way over-rated compared to the mind and ability to communicate. 2.) I would like any links to specific emergent technologies that you may know of the treat or repair such problems and return a person to a normal life within the next 5-15 years. 3.) I would like any information on where I can help him find funding for such things as high-end computers with speech recognition software and word predicition software such as Stephen Hawking has. I am going to build him a nice system with plenty of ports and such, but the specific software and hardware will likely be more than either of us can afford. Any direct help, or leads or input on any of the above would be greatly appreciated. My goal is to take a truly terrible event and turn it into a positive thing. They are low-income and the kid is rather bright, but on a path to a labor job. My hope is that in the end he can become much more than what he would have and then he won;t look back on the paralysis as a life-robber, but a life giver. Thanks for all your input. Kevin Freels -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 22 17:44:23 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:44:23 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:32 AM 11/23/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >I would guess that you are an INTJ, Damien. Of course. But that's how this thread started, with my declaring in effect, "Ich bin ein INTJer, and so say all of us, hip hip horray!' :) Damien Broderick From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 18:11:12 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:11:12 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? My Intuition score is 100%, Thinking-score is 88%. The IQ score I got this time is 138 but it couldn't be true: it's more likely to be in the presidential range (below 120). Sorry for dragging down the average hereabouts :) Rafal On 11/22/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 12:32 AM 11/23/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > > >I would guess that you are an INTJ, Damien. > > Of course. But that's how this thread started, with my declaring in effect, > "Ich bin ein INTJer, and so say all of us, hip hip horray!' :) > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 22 18:20:51 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:20:51 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.co m> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122122013.031d6f50@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:11 PM 11/22/2005 -0600, Rafal wrote: >The IQ score I got this time is 138 but it couldn't be true: it's more >likely to be in the presidential range (below 120). Don't be bloody ridiculous. Damien Broderick From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 22 18:23:38 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:23:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511221824.jAMIOFIZ008343@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts responded: > That's an interesting point of view, Brent. How do you suppose this will > happen? It's easy. To date, science has only focused on cause and effect properties of nature. But as consciousness proves - there are also phenomenal properties. Once we just look in the right place - we will see (or rather eff) them. > Recently I read Chalmer's book on the subject of consciousness, (The > Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195117891/103-0973791- > 2204613?v=glance&n=283155). > > I was left with the impression that the 'hard problem of consciousness' > will be probably one of the last important questions of science. Solving > it in 10 years would be quite an accomplishment. Yes, amongst brain researchers, Chalmers is getting very close. But it's not really that "hard" of a problem. It's just not causal properties - and we refuse to consider anything but causal/complexity things - making it seem hard only because we are looking in the wrong place - thinking they will some how "emerge". > I like the argument about Mary, the hypothetical neuroscientist who knows > everything that can possibly be known about neuroscience and the > perception color, but who lives in a black and white world. Does she > really know "what it is like" to see the color red? i.e., does she know > about qualia? The answer seems to be no. This is another great example of someone getting close to the critical issue of phenomenal properties - but it is still making things to unnecessarily complex and "hard". What red is like isn't all that complex of an issue. It's simply a phenomenal property of something in our brain. You don't need some huge paper and complex story about some neuroscientist to describe what I just did in two sentences. > How can empirical science ever grasp qualia? Just as we have cataloged and measured the fundamental elements of nature (at least the causal properties of these elements) we will cataloge all qualia or phenomenal properties - and the neural correlates that have them. Once we do this we will reproduce these correlates in other minds which will result in "effing" or other minds experiencing them. Eugene replied: > We're already seeing and measuring qualia all the time. And > Are you familiar with open-brain electrostimulation? Why do you think does > common juice make all these qualia sing and dance? Exactly - electrostimulation is almost exactly effing! We are so close but people are just too distracted, misdirected, and just can't see what should be obvious. > It's an emergent property of the physical system between our ears. No, calling it "emergent" implies that phenomenal properties some how "emerge" from abstracted causal properties that are complex enough. This is the big mistake everyone is making by looking here. Phenomenal properties are fundamental properties of nature that can represent information - they don't "emerge" from some abstract simulation that is complex enough. > It is an entirely unremarkable property, unless it introspects. Saying a phenomenal property like red is "entirely unremarkable" is a very stupid thing to say - in my mind. I bet 20 years from now - or whenever you experience/eff your first qualia you have never experienced before - you will agree. What do you mean by "unless it introspects"? > If you'd give me a measurement procedure for qualia not requiring a person > you'd have a point. We will be effing these phenomenal properties to each other and to artificial minds. Our conscious minds will merge be shared and so on. That is how we will objectively (or is subjectively the better term here?) measure and quantify them. >>> Yes. Assuming, your qualia is everybody's qualia. (I'm having trouble to understand, because qualia means absolutely nothing to me. Just as soul, vis vitalis, or phlogiston).<<<< This kind of thinking is exactly the mistaken thinking that distracts everyone and makes things seem so "hard". >>> Sorry, there's no way to way to remove the suffering from an accurate model. Zombies are strictly ficticious. <<< We have "intelligent" cameras that can tell us much more precisely what color something is than we can. But a camera is very much a "Zombie" and the way it represents and knows about color information (though much more capable than us) is very different from the phenomenal properties we use to represent the same information. This realization and discovery will be the most significant and life changing scientific achievement to date. All we need to do is look in the right place. So, anyone willing to make a bet? I say 10 years. Brent Allsop From brian at posthuman.com Tue Nov 22 18:28:47 2005 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:28:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Friend in need - son paralyzed from the neck down In-Reply-To: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> References: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> Message-ID: <4383635F.5030500@posthuman.com> I would do some quick searching regarding any things that can be done immediately after such an injury. For instance I think there are some experimental studies going on currently that are seeking out newly injured folks to test nerve growth factors on and other things. The chance to participate in such a study may be very fleeting. -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 18:43:56 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:43:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Friend in need - son paralyzed from the neck down In-Reply-To: <4383635F.5030500@posthuman.com> References: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> <4383635F.5030500@posthuman.com> Message-ID: I recall a story about a man whose son or daughter was paralyzed in an accident involving a backyard swingset. He did exactly what Brian is suggesting here, and was able to find an experimental treatment that helped. -gts On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:28:47 -0500, Brian Atkins wrote: > I would do some quick searching regarding any things that can be done > immediately after such an injury. For instance I think there are some > experimental studies going on currently that are seeking out newly > injured folks to test nerve growth factors on and other things. The > chance to participate in such a study may be very fleeting. From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 22 19:10:23 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:10:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: TOP 2 IQ Percentile References: <200511130208.jAD28He08413@tick.javien.com><6.2.1.2.0.20051112205652.01dad858@pop-server.satx.rr.com><025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc><43822925.3050707@sasktel.net><61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com><710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com><000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003901c5ef98$7cd74f80$71b81b97@administxl09yj> Damien ha risposto, > One of 16 temperament typological categories, > as defined by the Myers-Briggs instrument. Emlyn ha risposto, > http://www.keirsey.com/ > pop-psychology nonsense for the most part, > but it's the fun stuff :-) Ah! It seems I'm 'idealist'. Not so bad :-) s. From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 22 19:08:55 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:08:55 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> References: <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511221108m495b128ek37ab4476c9864473@mail.gmail.com> On 11/22/05, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? > > My Intuition score is 100%, Thinking-score is 88%. > > The IQ score I got this time is 138 but it couldn't be true: it's more > likely to be in the presidential range (below 120). > > Sorry for dragging down the average hereabouts :) Your attempt at humor belies a keen mind, Rafal. I'm INTJ, strong on the INT and borderline on the J. 146 according to Stanford-Binet many years ago. - Jef From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 22 19:25:17 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:25:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > On 22/11/05, spike wrote: > > > Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test > differences may > > > bias the distribution - and please be honest! > > > > Wooohooo! 144. > > Snap! 144. 143 - but I was interrupted with a phone call in the middle of it, and I recall that IQ tests do judge based on time. The response email had a link to another IQ test of theirs; I took that uninterrupted, and got 147. From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 22 19:23:35 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:23:35 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.co m> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122135243.07c28830@unreasonable.com> Rafal wrote: >BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? I'm xNTP. I used to be (and still think of myself as) a clear INTP, but my score is now equally split between I and E, as I grow more gregarious. I first learned of Myers-Briggs from an article in Communications of the ACM, "The Intuitive Computer Programmer," about twenty years ago, which pointed out that while INTP is 1% of the general population, it's a very high fraction (I forget how high) of programmers. -- David. From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 22 20:09:38 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:09:38 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051121213505.08ad7bc8@unreasonable.com> References: <43822919.2070303@sasktel.net> <6.2.3.4.2.20051121213505.08ad7bc8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122145909.08c9c778@unreasonable.com> I wrote: >Although John Sununu, PhD in chemical engineering, NH Governor, and >later Bush-1 Chief of Staff, had one of the highest recorded scores >on the Langdon IQ test that appeared in Omni. Kevin is a diligent >psychometrician; Sununu's score is at the 1 in a million mark, >around an IQ of 177. My posting was close enough for folk, but slightly inaccurate. Sununu's high score was on the Ron Hoeflin's Mega test. I was confused because Omni also printed Langdon's LAIT in a different issue. Sununu's score of 44 put him at an IQ of 180 (or 5 SD, 1 in about 3.5 million). http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hoeflin.html Curiously, his son, also an engineer and now US Senator from NH, ranks as the most libertarian Congress critter, even past Ron Paul, according to the Republican Liberty Caucus. http://www.republicanliberty.org/libdex/li2004_over.htm >Sen. John Sununu, NH: 89.5% >Sen.. Saxby Chamblis, GA: 87.5% >Rep. Ron Paul, TX14: 87.5% -- David. From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 21:08:56 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:08:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511221824.jAMIOFIZ008343@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511221824.jAMIOFIZ008343@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:23:38 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > What red is like isn't all that complex of an issue. > It's simply a phenomenal property of something in our brain. You don't > need some huge paper and complex story about some neuroscientist to > describe what I just did in two sentences. Seems to me that to say 'It's simply a phenomenal property of something in our brain' is to avoid the question. How exactly is it that phenomenal properties of matter exist and lead to subjective experience? To quote Chalmers, "At the end of the day, the same criticism applies to any purely physical account of consciousness. For any physical process we specify there will be an unanswered question: Why should this process give rise to experience?" That is Chalmers' hard question. But maybe that is not the question you're trying to answer. > Exactly - electrostimulation is almost exactly effing! Assume we have this 'effing' technology, that it resembles electrostimulation. We attach the device to person A and flip the switch. He reports seeing red. We do the same with person B who also reports seeing red. This might seem a success, but is it? How can we be certain A and B actually experience the same qualia? How is this method qualitatively different from a more basic type of stimulation, such as simply asking A and B to gaze at the same red wall? Rather than stimulating the retina you are (presumably) stimulating certain neurological structures associated with 'redness'. You must be assuming that the same structures exist and work identically in every brain, yes? -gts From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 22 21:51:40 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:51:40 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts: > Seems to me that to say 'It's simply a phenomenal property of something in > our brain' is to avoid the question. How exactly is it that phenomenal > properties of matter exist and lead to subjective experience? How does matter have causal properties? We don't know how - we just know that they do. The same can also be said of phenomenal properties. Our conscious knowledge is made of phenomenal properties - so we know they exist. Just like causal properties - we don't really know why they exist. > To quote Chalmers, "At the end of the day, the same criticism applies to > any purely physical account of consciousness. For any physical process we > specify there will be an unanswered question: Why should this process give > rise to experience?" Yes, Chalmers gets very close here. When he is talking about "any purely physical account" he is talking about any cause and effect account observable through our cause and effect senses. He is ignoring the possibility that matter also has phenomenal properties which are ineffable to traditional cause and effect observation. What - do you expect to see green when you cut open a brain? He should not ask: "Why should this process give rise to experience?" He should say where and what are these phenomenal properties which our conscious knowledge is made of. And what are the neural correlates or what matter has them? > > Exactly - electrostimulation is almost exactly effing! > > Assume we have this 'effing' technology, that it resembles > electrostimulation. We attach the device to person A and flip the switch. > He reports seeing red. We do the same with person B who also reports > seeing red. This might seem a success, but is it? How can we be certain A > and B actually experience the same qualia? How is this method > qualitatively different from a more basic type of stimulation, such as > simply asking A and B to gaze at the same red wall? > > Rather than stimulating the retina you are (presumably) stimulating > certain neurological structures associated with 'redness'. You must be > assuming that the same structures exist and work identically in every > brain, yes? Yes exactly. Red is and always will be red. Certainly the neural correlate that has red will always have the same red in any mind. Certainly there is a good chance some people represent 700 nm light with different phenomenal properties than others. The left hemisphere of our brain can have red and the right hemisphere of our brain can have green. Some how this is all unified into one conscious world and we know the difference between these to phenomenal properties even though they are occurring in two different hemispheres of our brain. Once we start hacking our brains - we will be able to similarly merge multiple minds and experience shared conscious worlds (or shared spirit worlds if you will). Then we will know for sure that red, and the same neural correlate that always produces it for you, is the same for me. Right? Will someone hurry and take my bet? ;) I want to make some money before someone finally discovers and realizes the obvious. Brent Allsop From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 22 22:17:23 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:17:23 +1100 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net><61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com><710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com><000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj><6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com><710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com><6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <04e301c5efb2$8340db10$8998e03c@homepc> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? I'm xNTx usually. > My Intuition score is 100%, Thinking-score is 88%. > > The IQ score I got this time is 138 but it couldn't be true: it's more > likely to be in the presidential range (below 120). > > Sorry for dragging down the average hereabouts :) The one's reporting their tickle scores are likely to be those a) willing to try it and b) not unhappy with the result. If its a pay for test, then those willing to pay for the fun of it is also a factor. Education can make a person smarter but shouldn't lift their IQ. And age matters. And people kid themselves and are subject to flattery so people selling us stuff usally take that into account. I haven't checked out the standard deviations on the tickle test. Brett Paatsch From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 23:01:57 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:31:57 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: References: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511221501t246c95a1n@mail.gmail.com> On 23/11/05, BillK wrote: > On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > > Emlyn you are younger than I. We are not getting smarter with > > age, that we can be sure. The other tests keep insisting > > early 130s. spike > > > > Yea, but you're supposed to get more sense as you get older, because > you make the 'Never again!' mistakes when you are young. After you've > had fifty years of making mistakes, you must know not to drink the > shampoo. You're not supposed to drink the shampoo?!?!?!?!? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 23:01:17 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:01:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:51:40 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > How does matter have causal properties? We don't know how - we just know > that they do. I think we know a great deal about physics, but we know practically nothing about how consciousness arises from inert matter. > Yes, Chalmers gets very close here. When he is talking about "any purely > physical account" he is talking about any cause and effect account > observable through our cause and effect senses. He is ignoring the > possibility that matter also has phenomenal properties which are > ineffable to traditional cause and effect observation. In your view does all matter have these phenomenal properties? And by that do you mean all matter is aware? This is pan-psychism -- one way to approach the 'hard problem'. Pan-psychism removes the need to explain the seemingly magical transformation from inert to aware. All matter is aware, and becomes self-aware in higher animals. > Red is and always will be red. Certainly the neural correlate that has > red will always have the same red in any mind. I'm not so certain. Consider taste as another form of qualia. Researchers discovered recently that taste buds are not uniform from one person to another. When you and I eat from the same lemon and speak of "sour" we may be referring to two distinct flavors. I see no reason to think color should be different. More to the point, I see no reason to think the neural correlates for red or sour should be identical from person to person. They may vary like taste buds. As the saying goes, there is no accounting for taste. :) > Certainly there is a good chance some people represent 700 nmlight with > different phenomenal properties than others. Yes. > Then we will know for sure that red, and the same neural correlate that > alwaysproduces it for you, is the same for me. Right? I'm not convinced, but perhaps a more important question is how your hypothesis can be tested. I don't see how A can ever be certain his experience is identical to B. > Will someone hurry and take my bet? ;) I want to make some money before > someone finally discovers and realizes the obvious. I'm game, but you'll need first to think of a way to test it. :) -gts From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 23:03:26 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:33:26 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> References: <710b78fc0511220601n3c9f01e9o@mail.gmail.com> <200511221549.jAMFn3e20562@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511221503u2c4793f9q@mail.gmail.com> On 23/11/05, spike wrote: > > > > Wooohooo! 144. > > > > Snap! 144. > > > > But don't go taking points off yourself Spike, come on! I'm keeping > > all of mine, that's for sure. > > > > -- > > Emlyn > > Emlyn you are younger than I. We are not getting smarter with > age, that we can be sure. The other tests keep insisting > early 130s. spike > Yes, but I'm aging faster :-( -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 22 23:04:34 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:04:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > The IQ score I got this time is 138 Same here. I did the test at 7 am this morning ;) -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 23:06:53 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:36:53 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <025901c5eed0$04e37170$8998e03c@homepc> <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511221506i590dc2cev@mail.gmail.com> On 23/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 12:32 AM 11/23/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > > >I would guess that you are an INTJ, Damien. > > Of course. But that's how this thread started, with my declaring in effect, > "Ich bin ein INTJer, and so say all of us, hip hip horray!' :) > > Damien Broderick > Did I mention that my memory is terrible? I forget... I wonder, is there anyone at all on this list who gets categorised as an "S" on the "N/S" dimension? I think S is more common in a random sample of the population, but I've never heard any exi postor claim to be one. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 23:07:43 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 23:07:43 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Friend in need - son paralyzed from the neck down In-Reply-To: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> References: <014a01c5ef88$b0622560$0100a8c0@kevin> Message-ID: On 11/22/05, kevinfreels.com wrote: > > I have a fried who's 13 yr old son was just paralyzed from the neck down > as a result of a tornado. > The son is having serious problems dealing with it and I would like to > extend him some hope and help. > I would like to ask for your assistance with one or more of the following: > 1:) I would like specific examples of people with similar disabilities > making their contributions to society. Stephen Hawking for example. A short > narrative of a specific person you know with some links to further > information would be nice. I would like him to understand that he is not > alone and that legs are way over-rated compared to the mind and ability to > communicate. > 2.) I would like any links to specific emergent technologies that you may > know of the treat or repair such problems and return a person to a normal > life within the next 5-15 years. > There's lots happening. Here are three approaches that show great promise http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_50/b3711191.htm http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1754008,00.html http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200411/kt2004112617575710440.htm Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 22 23:07:54 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:07:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511221507s5c37de06l9ce6ebc707a21399@mail.gmail.com> On 11/22/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > How does matter have causal properties? We don't know how - we just know > that they do. The same can also be said of phenomenal properties. Our > conscious knowledge is made of phenomenal properties - so we know they > exist. Just like causal properties - we don't really know why they exist. > > > To quote Chalmers, "At the end of the day, the same criticism applies to > > any purely physical account of consciousness. For any physical process we > > specify there will be an unanswered question: Why should this process give > > rise to experience?" Brent, have you considered turning the question around--and assuming a universe that has no "phenomenal properties"--what it might be like for organisms that evolved the capability to model their surroundings as many primitive organisms do, and then took the next step and began to include themselves in the model for the additional fitness this enhanced model provided? If such a theory accounted for all the observations, including an organism that would know and feel an immediate and indisputable sense of itself within its surroundings, then wouldn't that theory be preferable to one that requires some additional and mysterious "phenomenal properties"? Taking it up a level, could you also imagine how in this purely physical model, that a self-aware organism, evolved to protect its "self" at all cost, may find it nearly impossible to expand its concept of its world such that its "self" --its own special viewpoint--really isn't anything special in any measurable, objective sense? I realize that the foregoing is rife with loopholes and tempting distractions. If you're up to it, I suggest only that you might play with such an impersonal and heartlessly objective scenario for a while and see where it takes you. Some people have, and have found it similar to going into the void and emerging on the other side with all as it was before, only more so. - Jef From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 23:17:48 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 23:17:48 +0000 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: References: <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/22/05, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > The IQ score I got this time is 138 > > Same here. I did the test at 7 am this morning ;) > > I didn't notice, but was there a time limit? I did mine pretty rapidly since I assumed that time was being measured. Otherwise anyone could get full marks by spending a few days working it all out. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 22 23:50:09 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:50:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Internet: a commie, socialist conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> References: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Jack Parkinson wrote: > Some interesting observations and opinions from Slate magazine. In a world > ruled by profit-focused business - the Internet could never have arisen... While I do not agree with Eric Raymond very often, he couldn't have said things better when he came up with: "All of us are smarter than any of us" Progress is made through collaboration, sharing ideas with each other and incrementally improving on each other's ideas. Suggesting that the scientific principles of publication and peer review are detrimental to engineering is nothing short of ludicrous, in my opinion. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From emerson at singinst.org Wed Nov 23 00:54:04 2005 From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:54:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Singularity Institute - In Need of a New Logo Message-ID: <20051123005350.9F6DD99D6@mailrelay.t-mobile.com> The Institute has a unique mission. I'd like to have a meaningful, remarkable logo to go with it. To help make this possible, the amount I would have paid to the design firm I was working with to create a logo will instead be given to you, or someone you know, for an acceptable design. The design firm has been unable to create a design that's appropriate for us. If you're interested in having The Singularity Institute indebted to you for a brilliant logo design, please reach me at emerson at singinst.org. Thanks! We have a number of special announcements forthcoming at the beginning of December. Ideally, I'd like to have a design finalized by November 29th. I'll pass along specifics off-list to anyone interested. Please no on-list replies or discussion. Best, ~~ Tyler Emerson | Executive Director The Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence Box 50182 | Palo Alto, CA 94303 | T-F: 866 667 2524 emerson at singinst.org | http://www.singinst.org From extropy at unreasonable.com Wed Nov 23 03:28:01 2005 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:28:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122222340.0825d9a8@unreasonable.com> For the distaff among us. -- David. >Call for subs: She's Such a Geek > >15 November 2005, 11:06 AM > >Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are editing an anthology of essays >titled She's Such a Geek; below is a copy of the call for subs (posted >with permission). Spread the word! > >Note that this anthology is open only to female writers. > >Also note that I'm not affiliated with it in any way, nor do I know >anything about it beyond what's below; if you have questions, please >direct them to the editors. >She's Such a Geek > >An Anthology by and for Women Obsessed with Computers, Science, Comic >Books, Gaming, Spaceships, and Revolution > >Slated for Fall 2006 > >Geeks are taking over the world. They make the most popular movies and >games, pioneer new ways to communicate using technology, and create >new ideas that will change the future. But the stereotype is that only >men can be geeks. So when are we going to hear from the triumphant >female nerds whose stories of outer space battles will inspire >generations, and whose inventions will change the future? Right now. > >Female geeks are busting out of the labs and into the spotlight. They >have the skills and knowledge that can inspire social progress, >scientific breakthroughs, and change the world for the better, and >they're making their voices heard, some for the first time, in Annalee >Newitz and Charlie Anders' book She's Such a Geek. This anthology will >celebrate women who have flourished in the male-dominated realms of >technical and cultural arcana. We're looking for a wide range of >personal essays about the meaning of female nerdhood by women who are >in love with genomics, obsessed with blogging, learned about sex from >Dungeons and Dragons, and aren't afraid to match wits with men or >computers. The essays in She's Such a Geek will explain what it means >to be passionately engaged with technical or obscure topics?and how to >deal with it when people tell you that your interests are weird, >especially for a girl. This book aims to bust stereotypes of what it >means to be a geek, as well as what it means to be female. > >More than anything, She's Such a Geek is a celebration and call to >arms: it's a hopeful book which looks forward to a day when women will >pilot spaceships, invent molecular motors, design the next ultra-tiny >supercomputer, write epics, and run the government. > >We want introspective essays that explain what being a geek has meant >to you. Describe how you've fought stereotypes to be accepted among >nerds. Explore why you are obsessed with topics and ideas that are >supposed to be "for boys only." Tell us how you felt the day you >realized that you would be devoting the rest of your life to >discovering algorithms or collecting comic books. We want strong, >personal writing that is also smart and critical. We don't mind if you >use the word "fuck," and we don't mind if you use the word >"telomerase." Be celebratory, polemical, wistful, angry, and just >plain dorky. > >Possible topics include: > > * what turned you into a geek > * your career in science, technology, or engineering > * growing up geeky > * being a geek in high school today > * battling geek stereotypes (i.e racial stereotypes and geekdom, >cultural analysis of geek chic and the truth about nerds, the idea >that women have to choose between being sexually desirable and smart, >stereotypes about geek professions such as computer programmers) > * sex and dating among geeks > * science fiction fandom > * role-playing game or comic-book subcultures > * the joys of math > * blogging or videogames > * female geek bonding > * geek role models for women > * feminist commentary on geek culture > * women's involvement in DIY science and technology groups > * stories from women involved in geek pop and underground >cultures. These might include comic book writers, science fiction >writers, electronic music musicians, and women interested in the >gaming world. > * women's web networks and web zine grrrl culture > * issues of sexism in any or all of the above themes > >Editors: Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are geeky women writers. >Annalee is a contributing editor at Wired magazine and writes the >syndicated column Techsploitation. Charlie is the author of Choir Boy >(Soft Skull Press) and publisher of other magazine. > >Publisher: Seal Press, an imprint of Avalon Publishing Group, >publishes groundbreaking books by and for women in a variety of >topics. > >Deadline: January 15, 2006 > >Length: 3,000-6,000 words > >Format: Essays must be typed, double-spaced, and paginated. Please >include your address, phone number, email address, and a short bio on >the last page. Essays will not be returned. > >Submitting: Send essay electronically as a Document or Rich Text >Format file to Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders at >sheissuchageek at gmail.com. > >Payment: $100 plus two books > >Reply: Please allow until February 15 for a response. If you haven't >received a response by then, please assume your essay has not been >selected. It is not possible to reply to every submission personally. > >TrackBack URL for this entry: >http://www.kith.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3553 From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 23 03:55:35 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:55:35 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511230356.jAN3uAe00659@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes ... > > > Wooohooo! 144. > > > > Snap! 144. > > 143 - but I was interrupted with a phone call in the middle of it, and > I recall that IQ tests do judge based on time. The response email had > a link to another IQ test of theirs; I took that uninterrupted, and got > 147. I don't know if that one was timed, but it has an interesting feature: it decides which questions to give you based on how you do on previous ones. Recall that it had four different screens. The first few questions were easy, so you got all those right. Then it gave you a harder set of questions. Had you screwed up on that first set, I imagine it would give you a second set of easy questions, then your score would have been lower. Notice that last set of questions was damn hard. Had the test not had this adaptive feature, it would have only 20 possible scores. We could test this notion by intentionally messing up the first set of questions. Did anyone here try that? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 23 04:00:54 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:00:54 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122135243.07c28830@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <200511230401.jAN41Fe01386@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of David Lubkin > Subject: Re: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] > > Rafal wrote: > > >BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? > > I'm xNTP. I used to be (and still think of myself as) a clear INTP, > but my score is now equally split between I and E, as I grow more > gregarious... > > -- David Cool me too. I was a clear INTP years ago, but lately have been getting xNTP or ENTP. It occurred to me that with sufficient intelligence, one can carefully observe cool gregarious people, then simulate their behavior, thus becoming an extroverted hipster oneself. spike {8-] From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 23 04:16:18 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:16:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200511230416.jAN4Gae03011@tick.javien.com> ... > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki ... > Subject: Re: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] > > BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related?... Is INTP related? If so, I'm related. Thinking about the previous comments on IQ tests, most would agree that there is a definite learning curve to the tests: playing with them trains the mind to do better, whereas the IQ doesn't actually improve. The Mensa tests have a greater learning curve than even a standard IQ test, because of the backhand way they ask certain questions: Mary likes apples but not pears. She likes apricots but not grapes. Will she like peaches? If you do those puzzles you know they are asking: set A contains apples and apricots. Set B contains pears and grapes. Are peaches in set A or B? So here's one for proles interested in puzzles and IQ tests. Surely you have heard of the sudoku craze that showed up a few months ago. I intentionally stayed away from them, because I see how it could be the next Freecell, a huge time sink. I solved my first one yesterday and did a couple today, and sure enough it is an intriguing game. Nowthen, one can see that there are logical shortcuts that can be derived. The IQ test would be to do a number of these puzzles, writing down how long it took to do each, then compare your curve with other smart people. So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical sudoku to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are actually measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already are at puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a puzzle-learning contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger among us will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the veteran puzzle prole? Who is in? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 23 04:46:50 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:46:50 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511230356.jAN3uAe00659@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <200511230446.jAN4kre06237@tick.javien.com> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike ... > > Had the test not had this adaptive feature, it > would have only 20 possible scores. > > We could test this notion by intentionally messing up > the first set of questions. Did anyone here try that? > > spike OK I found out the test isn't adaptive. I intentionally gave wrong answers for the first 10 questions and it kept giving me the same questions as before. So this really isn't a valid IQ test. {8-[ Does anyone know a site that offers a free adaptive IQ test? Perhaps we could make one. spike From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 23 04:53:40 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:53:40 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> gts: >>> I think we know a great deal about physics, but we know practically nothing about how consciousness arises from inert matter. <<< All we know about physics is its causal properties. If something causes something it will set in motion a string of cause and effects that will eventually produce a phenomenal property in our brain, which will be our conscious awareness of the initial causal property we perceive. Because of their subjective and to date unshare able or ineffable nature we have been completely ignoring anything additional to this. That is why we know so little about them. But just because we have been ignoring the red in our consciousness (or worse, thinking red is a property of something that reflects 700 nm light and thinking we need nothing like this in our brain) doesn?t change how phenomenal it is and how entirely different it is from anything that is only causal. >>> In your view does all matter have these phenomenal properties? And by that do you mean all matter is aware? This is pan-psychism -- one way to approach the 'hard problem'. Pan-psychism removes the need to explain the seemingly magical transformation from inert to aware. All matter is aware, and becomes self-aware in higher animals. <<<< A camera can be ?self aware? by pointing it in a mirror. The picture it takes of itself is information that represents itself ? hence it has knowledge of itself or is ?self-aware?. But again this knowledge of itself is not composed of phenomenal properties like our conscious knowledge of ourselves is. From what you describe of ?Pan-psychism? here it doesn?t sound reasonable. We don?t know if all matter has phenomenal properties ? or if matter only achieves these phenomenal properties when it is in particular complex states in highly organized groups of neurons or whatever. We just know absolutely what red is like, how it is different than green, salty, and so on and how this is very different than something that is purely abstractly causal. Knowing the answer to these types of question in great detail will be one ?test? of whether this phenomenal property theory is correct or not. This is what we must discover and indeed what this theory says we should be looking for. Not some way for consciousness to ?arise from some causal property? as Chalmers so brilliantly points out. > > Red is and always will be red. Certainly the neural > > correlate that has red will always have the same red > > in any mind. > I'm not so certain. Why? Has red ever changed during your life time? Has salty? Have you ever confused red (the A qualia) with green (the B qualia) or salty? Red is and always will be red ? no confusion whatsoever and we always know very reliably that A is like A and not like B. Sure, taste is a bit more nebulous and fleeting and obviously people taste things very differently (represent the same chemical content of food with different quale) ? To me that simply says we should focus on the plain, simple, and constant ones, like color, first and an understanding of the others will follow. > I'm game, but you'll need first to think of a way to test it. :) You must not be paying attention. When or if we discover what part of matter, in what state, has these phenomenal properties ? we will be able to reliably tell when someone is experiencing red or green...by causally observing the particular correlates of matter that have those phenomenal properties. When we can eff qualia to other minds (including artificial minds) by reconstructing the matter in the proper state in other minds, enabling us to know what other conscious minds are like or which quale they use to represent various types of information, that will be the proof of the theory. True, it might be a bit hard to define precisely what I am claiming will happen within the next 10 years. I?m mainly saying that someone will finally recognize that we should not be looking for some property to emerge from only causal properties of nature. Someone will realize there must be phenomenal properties in nature in addition to causal properties. And with this theory ? someone will start looking in the right place and finally discover them (i.e. be able to reliably predict when people are experiencing red and cause people to experience red when they throw the switch ) I am also claiming this will be popularly accepted as the greatest and most earth changing scientific achievement to date. It will finally solve the ?problem of other minds?, make the ineffable effable, tell us what spirits are (and are not) make Turing (and all others) seem stupid for coming up with the Turing test as the best way to know if something else is conscious rather than something more like just asking them ?what is red like for you? and so on. If all of this happens before 10 years, I will win. I am betting this will obviously be the case and that there will be no argument from any intelligent person. If any of this doesn?t come to pass ? or if it turns out to be something different than phenomenal properties (could red really ?emerge? from or be nothing more than abstractly simulated by a complex set of causal properties?) ? then I lose. Can you think of some better ways to better pin this down based on what I?m trying to say? Brent Allsop From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 23 05:12:10 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:12:10 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122220640.01c39bf8@mail.comcast.net> Jef, <<<< Brent, have you considered turning the question around--and assuming a universe that has no "phenomenal properties"--what it might be like for organisms that evolved the capability to model their surroundings as many primitive organisms do, and then took the next step and began to include themselves in the model for the additional fitness this enhanced model provided? >>>> Absolutely. I think it is very possible to abstractly simulate or model most everything in the universe with purely abstract ? causal only ? systems. The only problem is ? when this universe advances to the stage where we are ? and start figuring out how the brain works things will diverge. Unless we do an obscene amount of unnecessary abstract complexity trying to model behavior as if they did experience what phenomenal properties are like. These simulated non phenomenal zombies ? will not be very concerned with what red is like ? because it will not be like anything and will only be represented by some abstract causal representation. I also think phenomenal properties are a big part of what makes us so intelligent and motivated. I bet it is much more difficult (though not impossible) to represent so much information and motivation with purely abstract and causal only computational systems. Brent From nanogirl at halcyon.com Wed Nov 23 05:21:40 2005 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:21:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122222340.0825d9a8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <00a201c5efed$dd5aa500$0200a8c0@Nano> In case you forgot who Annalee Newitz is: http://www.nanoindustries.com/essays/extropyresponse.htm Looks like the link on my site to the original article, is out of date, but you can find it here: http://lists.alternet.org/columnists/story/19850/ 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 3D/Animation http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." ----- Original Message ----- From: David Lubkin To: exi chat list Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 7:28 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek For the distaff among us. -- David. >Call for subs: She's Such a Geek > >15 November 2005, 11:06 AM > >Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are editing an anthology of essays >titled She's Such a Geek; below is a copy of the call for subs (posted >with permission). Spread the word! > >Note that this anthology is open only to female writers. > >Also note that I'm not affiliated with it in any way, nor do I know >anything about it beyond what's below; if you have questions, please >direct them to the editors. >She's Such a Geek > >An Anthology by and for Women Obsessed with Computers, Science, Comic >Books, Gaming, Spaceships, and Revolution > >Slated for Fall 2006 > >Geeks are taking over the world. They make the most popular movies and >games, pioneer new ways to communicate using technology, and create >new ideas that will change the future. But the stereotype is that only >men can be geeks. So when are we going to hear from the triumphant >female nerds whose stories of outer space battles will inspire >generations, and whose inventions will change the future? Right now. > >Female geeks are busting out of the labs and into the spotlight. They >have the skills and knowledge that can inspire social progress, >scientific breakthroughs, and change the world for the better, and >they're making their voices heard, some for the first time, in Annalee >Newitz and Charlie Anders' book She's Such a Geek. This anthology will >celebrate women who have flourished in the male-dominated realms of >technical and cultural arcana. We're looking for a wide range of >personal essays about the meaning of female nerdhood by women who are >in love with genomics, obsessed with blogging, learned about sex from >Dungeons and Dragons, and aren't afraid to match wits with men or >computers. The essays in She's Such a Geek will explain what it means >to be passionately engaged with technical or obscure topics-and how to >deal with it when people tell you that your interests are weird, >especially for a girl. This book aims to bust stereotypes of what it >means to be a geek, as well as what it means to be female. > >More than anything, She's Such a Geek is a celebration and call to >arms: it's a hopeful book which looks forward to a day when women will >pilot spaceships, invent molecular motors, design the next ultra-tiny >supercomputer, write epics, and run the government. > >We want introspective essays that explain what being a geek has meant >to you. Describe how you've fought stereotypes to be accepted among >nerds. Explore why you are obsessed with topics and ideas that are >supposed to be "for boys only." Tell us how you felt the day you >realized that you would be devoting the rest of your life to >discovering algorithms or collecting comic books. We want strong, >personal writing that is also smart and critical. We don't mind if you >use the word "fuck," and we don't mind if you use the word >"telomerase." Be celebratory, polemical, wistful, angry, and just >plain dorky. > >Possible topics include: > > * what turned you into a geek > * your career in science, technology, or engineering > * growing up geeky > * being a geek in high school today > * battling geek stereotypes (i.e racial stereotypes and geekdom, >cultural analysis of geek chic and the truth about nerds, the idea >that women have to choose between being sexually desirable and smart, >stereotypes about geek professions such as computer programmers) > * sex and dating among geeks > * science fiction fandom > * role-playing game or comic-book subcultures > * the joys of math > * blogging or videogames > * female geek bonding > * geek role models for women > * feminist commentary on geek culture > * women's involvement in DIY science and technology groups > * stories from women involved in geek pop and underground >cultures. These might include comic book writers, science fiction >writers, electronic music musicians, and women interested in the >gaming world. > * women's web networks and web zine grrrl culture > * issues of sexism in any or all of the above themes > >Editors: Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are geeky women writers. >Annalee is a contributing editor at Wired magazine and writes the >syndicated column Techsploitation. Charlie is the author of Choir Boy >(Soft Skull Press) and publisher of other magazine. > >Publisher: Seal Press, an imprint of Avalon Publishing Group, >publishes groundbreaking books by and for women in a variety of >topics. > >Deadline: January 15, 2006 > >Length: 3,000-6,000 words > >Format: Essays must be typed, double-spaced, and paginated. Please >include your address, phone number, email address, and a short bio on >the last page. Essays will not be returned. > >Submitting: Send essay electronically as a Document or Rich Text >Format file to Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders at >sheissuchageek at gmail.com. > >Payment: $100 plus two books > >Reply: Please allow until February 15 for a response. If you haven't >received a response by then, please assume your essay has not been >selected. It is not possible to reply to every submission personally. > >TrackBack URL for this entry: >http://www.kith.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3553 _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 05:22:38 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:22:38 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511221506i590dc2cev@mail.gmail.com> References: <43822925.3050707@sasktel.net> <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511221506i590dc2cev@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511222122l2b05a717ie21cfa8db6db0569@mail.gmail.com> On 11/22/05, Emlyn wrote: > > I wonder, is there anyone at all on this list who gets categorised as > an "S" on the "N/S" dimension? I think S is more common in a random > sample of the population, but I've never heard any exi postor claim to > be one. ### Yes, this is a bit funny - either the frequencies of the four major groups of personalities are not quite what the descriptions claim, or else our group is an incredibly biased sample of the population. If the xNTJ's are indeed at most 5% of the population, the rarest of the four temperaments, a group like the extropians could only come together as a result of major self-selection. The articles about the polar opposites to the INTJ, like ESFP, sound like polite descriptions of the amiable nitwit. The choice of the paradigmatic examples of each character, e.g. Jefferson, Einstein, Darwin, and Curie for NT, vs. Lady Di and such for the others, are telling as well. What reasonable, non-airhead person would like to be compared to Lady Di? I could almost think the MBTI was developed as a feel-good exercise for geeks. Rafal From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 05:39:05 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:09:05 +1030 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <200511230401.jAN41Fe01386@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122135243.07c28830@unreasonable.com> <200511230401.jAN41Fe01386@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511222139v33e8ac64v@mail.gmail.com> On 23/11/05, spike wrote: > > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of David Lubkin > > Subject: Re: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] > > > > Rafal wrote: > > > > >BTW, is there anybody here who is *not* INTJ, or related? > > > > I'm xNTP. I used to be (and still think of myself as) a clear INTP, > > but my score is now equally split between I and E, as I grow more > > gregarious... > > > > -- David > > Cool me too. I was a clear INTP years ago, but lately > have been getting xNTP or ENTP. It occurred to me that > with sufficient intelligence, one can carefully observe > cool gregarious people, then simulate their behavior, thus > becoming an extroverted hipster oneself. > > spike > > {8-] > > Lol, that's me too. My N and P dimensions are extreme, but my T/F is much more ambiguous, as is my E/I . I used to be a solid I, but have moved slowly toward E over the years. In general, it's just too much hard work getting along in the world as an introvert. Easier to fight your phobias than live with the consequences. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) From acy.stapp at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 05:40:18 2005 From: acy.stapp at gmail.com (Acy Stapp) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 23:40:18 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: <200511230416.jAN4Gae03011@tick.javien.com> References: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200511230416.jAN4Gae03011@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: This sounds very exciting. Sign me up! I'm the ideal candidate since I've never done the puzzle before. Acy On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > > ... > So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical > sudoku > to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are > actually > measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already are > at > puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a > puzzle-learning > contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger among > us > will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the veteran > puzzle prole? > > Who is in? > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Wed Nov 23 05:47:50 2005 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (M.B. Baumeister) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:47:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek In-Reply-To: <00a201c5efed$dd5aa500$0200a8c0@Nano> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122222340.0825d9a8@unreasonable.com> <00a201c5efed$dd5aa500$0200a8c0@Nano> Message-ID: <52467.72.236.103.242.1132724870.squirrel@main.nc.us> > In case you forgot who Annalee Newitz is: > http://www.nanoindustries.com/essays/extropyresponse.htm Ah Gina, thanks for the reminder. What a nitwitty article she wrote. I thoroughly enjoyed your reply. Pity you never heard back from anyone. Regards, MB From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 23 05:51:02 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:51:02 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2005, at 8:08 PM, spike wrote: >> Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test differences >> may >> bias the distribution - and please be honest! >> > > > Wooohooo! 144. But I have taken this test before I > vaguely recall, and also I had a Mensa daily desk > calendar a couple years ago and so I got practice > on these kinds of questions. Probably should knock > off about 10 points for that. I got 142. I wonder what I missed. The test seemed really easy. The bad thing about an online test is that you can't easily find anyone to argue with about why your answer is really better than the "correct" one. :-) On different tests I've scored from 145 - 160+ over the years. Whatever. - samantha From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 05:51:17 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:21:17 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek In-Reply-To: <00a201c5efed$dd5aa500$0200a8c0@Nano> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20051122222340.0825d9a8@unreasonable.com> <00a201c5efed$dd5aa500$0200a8c0@Nano> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511222151v11129f9dn@mail.gmail.com> Yes, I think we remember her. Boo hiss. btw, didn't we do that gender thing last century? How daggy. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 23/11/05, Gina Miller wrote: > In case you forgot who Annalee Newitz is: > http://www.nanoindustries.com/essays/extropyresponse.htm > Looks like the link on my site to the original article, is out of date, but > you can find it here: > http://lists.alternet.org/columnists/story/19850/ > > > 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 > 3D/Animation http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm > Microscope Jewelry > http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm > Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com > "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Lubkin > To: exi chat list > Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 7:28 PM > Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: She's Such A Geek > > For the distaff among us. > > > -- David. > > >Call for subs: She's Such a Geek > > > >15 November 2005, 11:06 AM > > > >Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are editing an anthology of essays > >titled She's Such a Geek; below is a copy of the call for subs (posted > >with permission). Spread the word! > > > >Note that this anthology is open only to female writers. > > > >Also note that I'm not affiliated with it in any way, nor do I know > >anything about it beyond what's below; if you have questions, please > >direct them to the editors. > >She's Such a Geek > > > >An Anthology by and for Women Obsessed with Computers, Science, Comic > >Books, Gaming, Spaceships, and Revolution > > > >Slated for Fall 2006 > > > >Geeks are taking over the world. They make the most popular movies and > >games, pioneer new ways to communicate using technology, and create > >new ideas that will change the future. But the stereotype is that only > >men can be geeks. So when are we going to hear from the triumphant > >female nerds whose stories of outer space battles will inspire > >generations, and whose inventions will change the future? Right now. > > > >Female geeks are busting out of the labs and into the spotlight. They > >have the skills and knowledge that can inspire social progress, > >scientific breakthroughs, and change the world for the better, and > >they're making their voices heard, some for the first time, in Annalee > >Newitz and Charlie Anders' book She's Such a Geek. This anthology will > >celebrate women who have flourished in the male-dominated realms of > >technical and cultural arcana. We're looking for a wide range of > >personal essays about the meaning of female nerdhood by women who are > >in love with genomics, obsessed with blogging, learned about sex from > >Dungeons and Dragons, and aren't afraid to match wits with men or > >computers. The essays in She's Such a Geek will explain what it means > >to be passionately engaged with technical or obscure topics-and how to > >deal with it when people tell you that your interests are weird, > >especially for a girl. This book aims to bust stereotypes of what it > >means to be a geek, as well as what it means to be female. > > > >More than anything, She's Such a Geek is a celebration and call to > >arms: it's a hopeful book which looks forward to a day when women will > >pilot spaceships, invent molecular motors, design the next ultra-tiny > >supercomputer, write epics, and run the government. > > > >We want introspective essays that explain what being a geek has meant > >to you. Describe how you've fought stereotypes to be accepted among > >nerds. Explore why you are obsessed with topics and ideas that are > >supposed to be "for boys only." Tell us how you felt the day you > >realized that you would be devoting the rest of your life to > >discovering algorithms or collecting comic books. We want strong, > >personal writing that is also smart and critical. We don't mind if you > >use the word "fuck," and we don't mind if you use the word > >"telomerase." Be celebratory, polemical, wistful, angry, and just > >plain dorky. > > > >Possible topics include: > > > > * what turned you into a geek > > * your career in science, technology, or engineering > > * growing up geeky > > * being a geek in high school today > > * battling geek stereotypes (i.e racial stereotypes and geekdom, > >cultural analysis of geek chic and the truth about nerds, the idea > >that women have to choose between being sexually desirable and smart, > >stereotypes about geek professions such as computer programmers) > > * sex and dating among geeks > > * science fiction fandom > > * role-playing game or comic-book subcultures > > * the joys of math > > * blogging or videogames > > * female geek bonding > > * geek role models for women > > * feminist commentary on geek culture > > * women's involvement in DIY science and technology groups > > * stories from women involved in geek pop and underground > >cultures. These might include comic book writers, science fiction > >writers, electronic music musicians, and women interested in the > >gaming world. > > * women's web networks and web zine grrrl culture > > * issues of sexism in any or all of the above themes > > > >Editors: Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders are geeky women writers. > >Annalee is a contributing editor at Wired magazine and writes the > >syndicated column Techsploitation. Charlie is the author of Choir Boy > >(Soft Skull Press) and publisher of other magazine. > > > >Publisher: Seal Press, an imprint of Avalon Publishing Group, > >publishes groundbreaking books by and for women in a variety of > >topics. > > > >Deadline: January 15, 2006 > > > >Length: 3,000-6,000 words > > > >Format: Essays must be typed, double-spaced, and paginated. Please > >include your address, phone number, email address, and a short bio on > >the last page. Essays will not be returned. > > > >Submitting: Send essay electronically as a Document or Rich Text > >Format file to Annalee Newitz and Charlie Anders at > >sheissuchageek at gmail.com. > > > >Payment: $100 plus two books > > > >Reply: Please allow until February 15 for a response. If you haven't > >received a response by then, please assume your essay has not been > >selected. It is not possible to reply to every submission personally. > > > >TrackBack URL for this entry: > >http://www.kith.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3553 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 23 05:58:07 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:58:07 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <28797E84-01A1-41CA-9223-1E751ACEF2B2@mac.com> Ah, I stopped to fix a quick dinner. I feel better. :-) Actually I don't thing this one was timed. - s On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:25 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Emlyn wrote: > >> On 22/11/05, spike wrote: >> >>>> Please only report the tickle IQ scores otherwise test >>>> >> differences may >> >>>> bias the distribution - and please be honest! >>>> >>> >>> Wooohooo! 144. >>> >> >> Snap! 144. >> > > 143 - but I was interrupted with a phone call in the middle of it, and > I recall that IQ tests do judge based on time. The response email had > a link to another IQ test of theirs; I took that uninterrupted, and > got > 147. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From ml at gondwanaland.com Wed Nov 23 06:32:56 2005 From: ml at gondwanaland.com (Mike Linksvayer) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:32:56 -0500 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <28797E84-01A1-41CA-9223-1E751ACEF2B2@mac.com> References: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <28797E84-01A1-41CA-9223-1E751ACEF2B2@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051123063256.GA4489@or.pair.com> On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:25 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >--- Emlyn wrote: >>On 22/11/05, spike wrote: >>>Wooohooo! 144. >>Snap! 144. > >143 - but I was interrupted with a phone call in the middle of it, and >I recall that IQ tests do judge based on time. The response email had >a link to another IQ test of theirs; I took that uninterrupted, and >got >147. I hate to post on such a retarded (ha ha) thread, but 144 is probably the maximum score for the classic Tickle test: http://agoraphilia.blogspot.com/2005/11/maximum-iq-144.html Someone did a small study of online IQ tests, including tickle: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/convention/program/search/viewProgram.cfm?Abstract_ID=7004 This double-blind study utilized 60 participants placed into one of three equally distributed categories according to their composite ACT/SAT scores. Comparisons of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) with internet IQ tests from tickle.com, queendom.com, and iqtest.com showed low to modest correlations, questioning the overall validity of web IQ tests. I suppose that's nearly as surprising as finding most people reading this do well on IQ tests. -- Mike Linksvayer http://gondwanaland.com/ml/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 23 06:35:03 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:35:03 -0600 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051123003054.01df3700@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:51 PM 11/22/2005 -0800, Samantha wrote: > The test seemed really easy. Yes. >The bad thing about an online test is that you can't easily find >anyone to argue with about why your answer is really better than the >"correct" one. :-) One of the problems I always have is in detecting the expected level or register of response, and how much time to invest in checking the various lateral possibilities. In the tickle test, we were asked something like: find the odd man out of apple, peach, pear, grape. I doodled around for a while with this, before recording my initial instant reaction, that a grape grows on a vine while all the others grow on trees. But I assume the really smart answer would be something like: only Apple starts with a vowel and the alphanumeric values of its letters add to form an even number whose square root is Steve Job's birthday. Damien Broderick From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 06:53:53 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:53:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051122094717.GI2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051123065353.50751.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eugen Leitl wrote: > (I'm having trouble > to understand, because qualia means absolutely > nothing to me. Just as > soul, vis vitalis, or phlogiston). Thank you. I've been reading about 'qualia' in numerous posts over the years. Never could figure out what they were talking about. I feel better now. I'm not alone. Have a pleasant, warm, safe thanksgiving. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 23 07:07:27 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:07:27 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <20051123065353.50751.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051122094717.GI2249@leitl.org> <20051123065353.50751.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051123010616.01d1e480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:53 PM 11/22/2005 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: >I've been reading about 'qualia' in >numerous posts over the years. Never could figure out >what they were talking about. I feel better now. Ah, so you're experiencing the quale of "feeling better"? Damien Broderick From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 07:27:04 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:57:04 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051123010616.01d1e480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051122094717.GI2249@leitl.org> <20051123065353.50751.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051123010616.01d1e480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511222327v1ef3a922t@mail.gmail.com> No, "feel" is just an information processing term for these guys. They're zombies, but shush, don't tell them, you don't want to "upset" them. btw, has anyone read the Greg Egan short story collection "Axiomatic"? There are excellent stories in there for anyone into the whole "what is consciousness" thing. With regards to this thread, the story "Seeing" helped me to grok how the feeling of "existing" just behind my eyes is an illusion concocted by the hugely complex information processing machinery sitting (architecturally) between my senses and my awareness. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 23/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:53 PM 11/22/2005 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: > > >I've been reading about 'qualia' in > >numerous posts over the years. Never could figure out > >what they were talking about. I feel better now. > > Ah, so you're experiencing the quale of "feeling better"? > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 23 09:07:03 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:07:03 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <20051123090703.GL2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 02:51:40PM -0700, Brent Allsop wrote: > Will someone hurry and take my bet? ;) I want to make some money before > someone finally discovers and realizes the obvious. I will take your bet when you'll start making sense. So far you're in a superposition between a crank and a mystic. Are you looking for new physics in the brain? QC processing? Or are you just trapped in a sematic trap of your own design? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 10:29:02 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:29:02 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: On 11/23/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > Why? Has red ever changed during your life > time? Has salty? Have you ever confused red > (the A qualia) with green (the B qualia) or > salty? Red is and always will be red ? no > confusion whatsoever and we always know very > reliably that A is like A and not like B. > > Sure, taste is a bit more nebulous and fleeting > and obviously people taste things very > differently (represent the same chemical content > of food with different quale) ? To me that simply > says we should focus on the plain, simple, and > constant ones, like color, first and an > understanding of the others will follow. > But surely color is just as variable as taste? About 10% of men and 0.5% of women have some grade of color blindness. Red-green color defect is the most common. You can do the tests on-line. There are other, more rare, defects of the rods and cones in the eyes which cause more serious problems. The effects also vary depending on the amount of ambient light and the color contents of the ambient light. You know how orange street lighting can change your color perception? Color blindness can also change over time due to aging, medication or disease. But it is all totally relative. We learn at a very early age what everyone calls red and what everyone calls green, like the grass. But that does not mean that I see the same 'green' that you see. We have just agreed to call grass green. And we both also agree that the 'yellow' wallpaper in the kindergarten is different to the 'green' grass. But my 'yellow' experience might be very different from your 'yellow' experience. BillK From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 23 10:44:16 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:44:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 06:01:17PM -0500, gts wrote: > I think we know a great deal about physics, but we know practically > nothing about how consciousness arises from inert matter. Medicine and neuroscience are all scams, right? I'm also completely boggled over this "my sour is not your sour discussion". Reality models are self-calibrating (that's what the elves from hyperspace have told me), orelse we wouldn't be able to hold this discussion. P.S. I'm sorry for having taken the word 'qualia' in my mouth, and will now go wash it out with soap. Will never happen again, promise. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 23 11:19:01 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:19:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Internet: a commie, socialist conspiracy! In-Reply-To: References: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> Message-ID: <78BB4F95-DC9D-42B6-A66B-F7B2FDD422F4@mac.com> On Nov 22, 2005, at 3:50 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > >> Some interesting observations and opinions from Slate magazine. In >> a world >> ruled by profit-focused business - the Internet could never have >> arisen... >> > > While I do not agree with Eric Raymond very often, he couldn't > have said things better when he came up with: > > "All of us are smarter than any of us" Yep. It took massive collaboration to come up with Relativity. Eric Raymond took something cool to a broken extreme. > > Progress is made through collaboration, sharing ideas with > each other and incrementally improving on each other's ideas. > Breakthroughs do not come from this mechanism apparently. Granted steady improvements can come from this as well as coverage of some area of work. > Suggesting that the scientific principles of publication and > peer review are detrimental to engineering is nothing short > of ludicrous, in my opinion. > What kinds of peer review and what types of engineering? Peer review is not at all the same as claiming that "all of us are smarter than any of us". > -- > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan > If you truly write the code cleverly then you have shown every component is bug free as you went and by cleverly avoiding or severely limiting side-effects it then follows that the composite result doesn't need much debugging. Of course many popular languages make it rather difficult to write code this cleverly. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 23 11:29:48 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:29:48 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] Seven cents an hour? In-Reply-To: <20051123063256.GA4489@or.pair.com> References: <20051122192517.7234.qmail@web81601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <28797E84-01A1-41CA-9223-1E751ACEF2B2@mac.com> <20051123063256.GA4489@or.pair.com> Message-ID: <0939AF12-7535-48F7-943D-3217A7FE53A1@mac.com> On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:32 PM, Mike Linksvayer wrote: > > Someone did a small study of online IQ tests, including tickle: > http://www.psychologicalscience.org/convention/program/search/ > viewProgram.cfm?Abstract_ID=7004 > > This double-blind study utilized 60 participants placed > into one of three equally distributed categories according > to their composite ACT/SAT scores. Comparisons of the > Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) with internet > IQ tests from tickle.com, queendom.com, and iqtest.com > showed low to modest correlations, questioning the overall > validity of web IQ tests. > For a really tough online test (although you have to pay to get it officially graded) try some of the Hoeflin tests like http:// www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/power.html. These are the type you chew your way through over weeks. - samantha From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 11:57:49 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:27:49 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511230357v1c6cd0f1s@mail.gmail.com> If I understand correctly what Brent is saying, it is that there is such thing as qualia, they are essential to our subjective experience of being, and they wont necessarily just be present in any general intelligence. That third point is crucial. If it were so that they would just emerge, then there would be no argument between the materialists and the phenomenalists (or can I call them dualists?), because if you believe in them they would be there, and if you don't then they aren't, either way it's just metaphysics. But the argument comes up because the supporters of qualia say that it's possible that you can produce a general intelligence without qualia. This is what is refered to casually as a zombie. It's behaviourally indistinguishable from a "real" person, with qualia, but it doesn't have subjective experience. So what is being hypothesised is that we are general intelligences made up of the mundane causal, natural world stuff (matter & energy doing their thing) plus something else, by definition not part of the material world, which is (or is responsible for) the phenomenal aspect of our internal lives. The problem is, that we can talk about Qualia. We can discuss this subjective, otherworldly, phenomenal being-ness. Which is excellent, of course, because it makes for all kind of deep conversation, highly impressive and entertaining in general, the good stuff. But the embarrassing bit about such high falutin discourse is that we use our lowly mouths to do the speaking, or our excruciatingly material fingers to tap out our brilliant theories. And, these contain muscles and tendons and all kinds of gristly nasty stuff, that connect up to nerves, and on and upward, the-knee-bone's-connected-to-the-thigh-bone wise, finally to our admittedly impressive yet ultimately mundane material brain. Here, we've got a truly impressive information processing machine. It's capable of taking all the information from our senses, and from our thought processes and memories, grind away, and produce new thoughts and new impulses to action. But we are still in Zombie territory. Somewhere, we had the impulse to talk about phenomenal consciousness. Where did that impulse come from? If we are truly reporting on the experience of a phenomenal subjective experience, it must bridge over into our lowly brain matter somewhere. If we could map out the connections in the brain entirely, we must eventually find something completely inexplicable in the processing by natural means. Somewhere, for there to be a non-material part of conscious life, a ghostly signal must enter the brain from no material cause. A neuron must fire somewhere, with absolutely no reason for doing so. So if this is true, we'll find it eventually. We'll find the cable to the phone unplugged, and yet the telephone still rings, and it'll be just that spooky. But let's assume that we don't find this, that we find the brain as a whole, mapped down to the atomic level, is entirely internally consistent, and its function is, at least in principle, reproducible by a machine. Where does that leave subjective experience? Well, let's look at the case of zombies. Let's confine it to the class of zombies that are constructed in the future by us, using entirely materialist system architectures which are totally internally consistent in the way they work (ie: a closed causal system except for its well defined sense and action interfaces with the rest of the world). These zombies can be broken into two classes. Those that report subjective phenomenal experience, and those that do not. The zombies that refute any suggestion that they have subjective experience, or just can't understand the concept, are clearly GIs without subjective phenomenal experience (or liars). The zombies that protest that they do indeed have subjective phenomenal experience, though, raise a problem. They clearly work without input from a non-material component. Yet, they claim that they do have that phenomenal experience. So, we can only come up with two possibilities: 1 - The subjective phenomenal experience exists, and is entirely material, thus is epiphenomenal. 2 - They lie. >From this and the earlier discussion, I think we have two alternatives. Either, there is indeed a "magic signal" that propogates into the brain somehow from outside the physical world, which we must eventually find by the absense of cause at some point in the structure of the brain, or subjective experience is an ephenomenon of purely material processing. So, I agree with you in a way Brent... I think this question will be put to bed once and for all some time in the next decade or two, by straightforward brain science. But I wouldn't bet on qualia. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 23/11/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > gts: > > > >>> I think we know a great deal about physics, > but we know practically nothing about how > consciousness arises from inert matter. <<< > > All we know about physics is its causal > properties. If something causes something it > will set in motion a string of cause and effects > that will eventually produce a phenomenal > property in our brain, which will be our > conscious awareness of the initial causal > property we perceive. Because of their > subjective and to date unshare able or ineffable > nature we have been completely ignoring anything > additional to this. That is why we know so > little about them. But just because we have been > ignoring the red in our consciousness (or worse, > thinking red is a property of something that > reflects 700 nm light and thinking we need > nothing like this in our brain) doesn't change > how phenomenal it is and how entirely different > it is from anything that is only causal. > > > >>> In your view does all matter have these > phenomenal properties? And by that do you mean > all matter is aware? This is pan-psychism -- one > way to approach the 'hard problem'. Pan-psychism > removes the need to explain the seemingly magical > transformation from inert to aware. All matter is > aware, and becomes self-aware in higher animals. <<<< > > A camera can be "self aware" by pointing it in a > mirror. The picture it takes of itself is > information that represents itself ? hence it has > knowledge of itself or is "self-aware". But > again this knowledge of itself is not composed of > phenomenal properties like our conscious knowledge of ourselves is. > > From what you describe of "Pan-psychism" here it > doesn't sound reasonable. We don't know if all > matter has phenomenal properties ? or if matter > only achieves these phenomenal properties when it > is in particular complex states in highly > organized groups of neurons or whatever. We just > know absolutely what red is like, how it is > different than green, salty, and so on and how > this is very different than something that is > purely abstractly causal. Knowing the answer to > these types of question in great detail will be > one "test" of whether this phenomenal property > theory is correct or not. This is what we must > discover and indeed what this theory says we > should be looking for. Not some way for > consciousness to "arise from some causal > property" as Chalmers so brilliantly points out. > > > > > Red is and always will be red. Certainly the neural > > > > correlate that has red will always have the same red > > > > in any mind. > > > > > I'm not so certain. > > Why? Has red ever changed during your life > time? Has salty? Have you ever confused red > (the A qualia) with green (the B qualia) or > salty? Red is and always will be red ? no > confusion whatsoever and we always know very > reliably that A is like A and not like B. > > Sure, taste is a bit more nebulous and fleeting > and obviously people taste things very > differently (represent the same chemical content > of food with different quale) ? To me that simply > says we should focus on the plain, simple, and > constant ones, like color, first and an > understanding of the others will follow. > > > > I'm game, but you'll need first to think of a way to test it. :) > > You must not be paying attention. When or if we > discover what part of matter, in what state, has > these phenomenal properties ? we will be able to > reliably tell when someone is experiencing red or > green...by causally observing the particular > correlates of matter that have those phenomenal > properties. When we can eff qualia to other > minds (including artificial minds) by > reconstructing the matter in the proper state in > other minds, enabling us to know what other > conscious minds are like or which quale they use > to represent various types of information, that > will be the proof of the theory. > > True, it might be a bit hard to define precisely > what I am claiming will happen within the next 10 years. > > I'm mainly saying that someone will finally > recognize that we should not be looking for some > property to emerge from only causal properties of > nature. Someone will realize there must be > phenomenal properties in nature in addition to > causal properties. And with this theory ? > someone will start looking in the right place and > finally discover them (i.e. be able to reliably > predict when people are experiencing red and > cause people to experience red when they throw > the switch?) I am also claiming this will be > popularly accepted as the greatest and most earth > changing scientific achievement to date. It will > finally solve the "problem of other minds", make > the ineffable effable, tell us what spirits are > (and are not) make Turing (and all others) seem > stupid for coming up with the Turing test as the > best way to know if something else is conscious > rather than something more like just asking them > "what is red like for you"? and so on. > > If all of this happens before 10 years, I will > win. I am betting this will obviously be the > case and that there will be no argument from any > intelligent person. If any of this doesn't come > to pass ? or if it turns out to be something > different than phenomenal properties (could red > really "emerge" from or be nothing more than > abstractly simulated by a complex set of causal properties?) ? then I lose. > > Can you think of some better ways to better pin > this down based on what I'm trying to say? > > Brent Allsop From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 13:37:58 2005 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:37:58 +0100 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <04e301c5efb2$8340db10$8998e03c@homepc> References: <61c8738e0511211241i3118ecc7o3d3c5cde321d2917@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511211424g3757547eq@mail.gmail.com> <000301c5ef3e$27fd9c30$dbb41b97@administxl09yj> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122023028.03b40d10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0511220602j1b70f0d9h@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051122114242.0321fba0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60511221011y157996e5i6166dac2256c684c@mail.gmail.com> <04e301c5efb2$8340db10$8998e03c@homepc> Message-ID: <4902d9990511230537t4f16ced3u5dd272d18ab1eb37@mail.gmail.com> On 11/22/05, Brett Paatsch wrote: > The one's reporting their tickle scores are likely to be those > a) willing to try it and b) not unhappy with the result. I got a score of 135, but didn't post it because of the doubts on the validity of such tests. Also because I selected a random answer on one or two questions because of lack of a dictionary (the peach/pear/grape thing, for example), so who knows if I got it right. > If its a pay for test, then those willing to pay for the fun of > it is also a factor. You don't pay for that test (except with your privacy, since they ask for name/age etc, and figuring that at age and sex are relevant for the test, I filled the form correctly instead of the usual bogus answers), but if you want to know what the correct answers were you have to pay something. Alfio From HerbM at learnquick.com Wed Nov 23 08:11:57 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:11:57 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] FW: eSkeptic: Dawkins on the Illusion of Design (posting Shermers current newsletter, ID is disccussed and many may want to subscribe) Message-ID: _____ From: Michael Shermer [mailto:skepticssociety at skeptic.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 12:00 AM To: Herb Martin Subject: eSkeptic: Dawkins on the Illusion of Design eSkeptic: the email newsletter of the Skeptics Society Wednesday, November 23rd, 2005 | ISSN 1556-5696 _____ Adapting Minds book cover Sex, Jealousy & Violence A Skeptical Look at Evolutionary Psychology Dr. David Buller Sunday, December 11, 2pm Baxter Lecture Hall, Caltech, Pasadena, CA (The Skeptics Distinguished Lecture Series at Caltech) Was human nature really designed by natural selection in the Pleistocene epoch? The dominant view in evolutionary psychology holds that it was - that our psychological adaptations were designed tens of thousands of years ago to solve problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. In this lecture, based on his new book, Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature, Dr. David J. Buller, a professor of philosophy at Northern Illinois University, examines in detail the major claims of evolutionary psychology. Buller does not argue that we cannot apply evolutionary theory to human psychology, only that much of the conventional wisdom in evolutionary psychology is misguided. Our minds are not adapted to the Pleistocene, Buller says, but, like the immune system, we are continually adapting, over both evolutionary time and individual lifetimes. We must move beyond the reigning orthodoxy of evolutionary psychology to reach an accurate understanding of how human psychology is influenced by evolution. When we do, Buller claims, we will abandon not only the quest for human nature but the very idea of human nature itself. _____ photo of Richard Dawkins by Lalla Ward Richard Dawkins (copyright C Lalla Ward) In this week's eSkeptic we present an article by Richard Dawkins which appeared as the introduction to a special section on "Darwin & Evolution" in the November issue of Natural History magazine. The section was edited by Richard Milner, the singing Darwinian scholar who is known to many Skeptic readers, and features articles by Don Prothero on transitional fossils, Jonathan Weiner on natural selection in the wild, and many other articles of interest. Excerpts from the issue can be seen at www.naturalhistorymagazine.com and Richard Milner's latest performance dates are listed on his website www.darwinlive.com . This article copyright C Natural History magazine, Inc., 2005. Used by permission. Richard Dawkins, a world-renowned explicator of Darwinian evolution, is the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford, where he was educated. Dawkins's popular books about evolution and science include The Selfish Gene (Oxford University Press, 1976), The Blind Watchmaker (W.W. Norton, 1986), Climbing Mount Improbable (W.W. Norton, 1996), and most recently, The Ancestor's Tale (Houghton Mifflin, 2004), which retells the saga of evolution in a Chaucerian mode. _____ The Illusion of Design by Richard Dawkins The world is divided into things that look as though somebody designed them (wings and wagon-wheels, hearts and televisions), and things that just happened through the unintended workings of physics (mountains and rivers, sand dunes, and solar systems). Mount Rushmore belonged firmly in the second category until the sculptor Gutzon Borglum carved it into the first. Charles Darwin moved in the other direction. He discovered a way in which the unaided laws of physics - the laws according to which things "just happen" - could, in the fullness of geologic time, come to mimic deliberate design. The illusion of design is so successful that to this day most Americans (including, significantly, many influential and rich Americans) stubbornly refuse to believe it is an illusion. To such people, if a heart (or an eye or a bacterial flagellum) looks designed, that's proof enough that it is designed. No wonder Thomas Henry Huxley, "Darwin's bulldog," was moved to chide himself on reading the Origin of Species: "How extremely stupid not to have thought of that." And Huxley was the least stupid of men. The breathtaking power and reach of Darwin's idea - extensively documented in the field, as Jonathan Weiner reports in "Evolution in Action" - is matched by its audacious simplicity. You can write it out in a phrase: nonrandom survival of randomly varying hereditary instructions for building embryos. Yet, given the opportunities afforded by deep time, this simple little algorithm generates prodigies of complexity, elegance, and diversity of apparent design. True design, the kind we see in a knapped flint, a jet plane, or a personal computer, turns out to be a manifestation of an entity - the human brain - that itself was never designed, but is an evolved product of Darwin's mill. Paradoxically, the extreme simplicity of what the philosopher Daniel C. Dennett called Darwin's dangerous idea may be its greatest barrier to acceptance. People have a hard time believing that so simple a mechanism could deliver such powerful results. The arguments of creationists, including those creationists who cloak their pretensions under the politically devious phrase "intelligent-design theory," repeatedly return to the same big fallacy. Such-and-such looks designed. Therefore it was designed. To pursue my paradox, there is a sense in which the skepticism that often greets Darwin's idea is a measure of its greatness. Paraphrasing the twentieth-century population geneticist Ronald A. Fisher, natural selection is a mechanism for generating improbability on an enormous scale. Improbable is pretty much a synonym for unbelievable. Any theory that explains the highly improbable is asking to be disbelieved by those who don't understand it. Yet the highly improbable does exist in the real world, and it must be explained. Adaptive improbability - complexity - is precisely the problem that any theory of life must solve and that natural selection, uniquely as far as science knows, does solve. In truth, it is intelligent design that is the biggest victim of the argument from improbability. Any entity capable of deliberately designing a living creature, to say nothing of a universe, would have to be hugely complex in its own right. If, as the maverick astronomer Fred Hoyle mistakenly thought, the spontaneous origin of life is as improbable as a hurricane blowing through a junkyard and having the luck to assemble a Boeing 747, then a divine designer is the ultimate Boeing 747. The designer's spontaneous origin ex nihilo would have to be even more improbable than the most complex of his alleged creations. Unless, of course, he relied on natural selection to do his work for him! And in that case, one might pardonably wonder (though this is not the place to pursue the question), does he need to exist at all? The achievement of nonrandom natural selection is to tame chance. By smearing out the luck, breaking down the improbability into a large number of small steps - each one somewhat improbable but not ridiculously so - natural selection ratchets up the improbability. As the generations unfold, ratcheting takes the cumulative improbability up to levels that - in the absence of the ratcheting - would exceed all sensible credence. Many people don't understand such nonrandom cumulative ratcheting. They think natural selection is a theory of chance, so no wonder they don't believe it! The battle that we biologists face, in our struggle to convince the public and their elected representatives that evolution is a fact, amounts to the battle to convey to them the power of Darwin's ratchet - the blind watchmaker - to propel lineages up the gentle slopes of Mount Improbable. The misapplied argument from improbability is not the only one deployed by creationists. They are quite fond of gaps, both literal gaps in the fossil record and gaps in their understanding of what Darwinism is all about. In both cases the (lack of) logic in the argument is the same. They allege a gap or deficiency in the Darwinian account. Then, without even inquiring whether intelligent design suffers from the same deficiency, they award victory to the rival "theory" by default. Such reasoning is no way to do science. But science is precisely not what creation "scientists," despite the ambitions of their intelligent-design bullyboys, are doing. In the case of fossils, as Donald R. Prothero documents in "The Fossils Say Yes" [see the print issue of Natural History in which this article first appeared], today's biologists are more fortunate than Darwin was in having access to beautiful series of transitional stages: almost cinematic records of evolutionary changes in action. Not all transitions are so attested, of course - hence the vaunted gaps. Some small animals just don't fossilize; their phyla are known only from modern specimens: their history is one big gap. The equivalent gaps for any creationist or intelligent-design theory would be the absence of a cinematic record of God's every move on the morning that he created, for example, the bacterial flagellar motor. Not only is there no such divine videotape: there is a complete absence of evidence of any kind for intelligent design. Absence of evidence for is not positive evidence against, of course. Positive evidence against evolution could easily be found - if it exists. Fisher's contemporary and rival J.B.S. Haldane was asked by a Popperian zealot what would falsify evolution. Haldane quipped, "Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian." No such fossil has ever been found, of course, despite numerous searches for anachronistic species. There are other barriers to accepting the truth of Darwinism. Many people cannot bear to think that they are cousins not just of chimpanzees and monkeys, but of tapeworms, spiders, and bacteria. The unpalatability of a proposition, however, has no bearing on its truth. I personally find the idea of cousinship to all living species positively agreeable, but neither my warmth toward it, nor the cringing of a creationist, has the slightest bearing on its truth. The same could be said of political or moral objections to Darwinism. "Tell children they are nothing more than animals and they will behave like animals." I do not for a moment accept that the conclusion follows from the premise. But even if it did, once again, a disagreeable consequence cannot undermine the truth of a premise. Some have said that Hitler founded his political philosophy on Darwinism. This is nonsense: doctrines of racial superiority in no way follow from natural selection, properly understood. Nevertheless, a good case can be made that a society run on Darwinian lines would be a very disagreeable society in which to live. But, yet again, the unpleasantness of a proposition has no bearing on its truth. Huxley, George C. Williams, and other evolutionists have opposed Darwinism as a political and moral doctrine just as passionately as they have advocated its scientific truth. I count myself in that company. Science needs to understand natural selection as a force in nature, the better to oppose it as a normative force in politics. Darwin himself expressed dismay at the callousness of natural selection: "What a book a Devil's Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low & horridly cruel works of nature!" In spite of the success and admiration that he earned, and despite his large and loving family, Darwin's life was not an especially happy one. Troubled about genetic deterioration in general and the possible effects of inbreeding closer to home, as James Moore documents in "Good Breeding" [see November issue of Natural History magazine], and tormented by illness and bereavement, as Richard Milner's interview with the psychiatrist Ralph Colp Jr. shows in "Darwin 's Shrink," Darwin's achievements seem all the more. He even found the time to excel as an experimenter, particularly with plants. David Kohn's and Sheila Ann Dean's essays ("The Miraculous Season" and "Bee Lines and Worm Burrows" [See November issue of Natural History Magazine]) lead me to think that, even without his major theoretical achievements, Darwin would have won lasting recognition as an experimenter, albeit an experimenter with the style of a gentlemanly amateur, which might not find favor with modern journal referees. As for his major theoretical achievements, of course, the details of our understanding have moved on since Darwin's time. That was particularly the case during the synthesis of Darwinism with Mendelian digital genetics. And beyond the synthesis, as Douglas J. Futuyma explains in "On Darwin's Shoulders," [see November issue of Natural History Magazine] and Sean B. Carroll details further for the exciting new field of "evo-devo" in "The Origins of Form," Darwinism proves to be a flourishing population of theories, itself undergoing rapid evolutionary change. In any developing science there are disagreements. But scientists - and here is what separates real scientists from the pseudoscientists of the school of intelligent design - always know what evidence it would take to change their minds. One thing all real scientists agree upon is the fact of evolution itself. It is a fact that we are cousins of gorillas, kangaroos, starfish, and bacteria. Evolution is as much a fact as the heat of the sun. It is not a theory, and for pity's sake, let's stop confusing the philosophically naive by calling it so. Evolution is a fact. _____ The Ancestor's Tale book cover Richard Dawkins' DVDs & books available at Shop Skeptic * Dawkins interview in Skeptic vol.3 no.4 * Dawkins on Genes in Skeptic vol.7 no.2 * Dawkins writes "A Devil's Chaplin" in Skeptic vol.10 no.3 * River Out of Eden (DVD) * The Ancestor's Tale (DVD) * The Blind Watchmaker (paperback) * The Ancestor's Tale (hardback) _____ eSkeptic is a free, public newsletter published (almost) weekly by the Skeptics Society. Contents are Copyright C 2005 Michael Shermer, the Skeptics Society, and the authors and artists. Permission is granted to print, distribute, and post with proper citation and acknowledgment. Contact us at skepticssociety at skeptic.com. | This webpage is coded by Rocketday Arts to W3C compliant XHTML 1.1, adhering to accessibility guidelines set forth by the W3C's Web Accessibility Initiative and US Section 508, using Dublin Core RDF metadata. | Subscribe to eSkeptic by sending an email to join-skeptics at lyris.net. Unsubscribe by sending an email to leave-skeptics at lyris.net. | Browse, search, and read the eSkeptic archives online . Read other articles, order books, cds and dvds, browse announcements of events, and at subscribe to Skeptic magazine at www.skeptic.com. --- You are currently subscribed to skeptics as: [HerbM at learnquick.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-5111494-426405F at wood.lyris.net If this message was forwarded from a friend and you'd like to join the distribution list (it's FREE), e-mail join-skeptics at lyris.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 23 15:35:19 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 07:35:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511231535.jANFZqe21059@tick.javien.com> OK do 50. Keep track of the solve times. spike _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Acy Stapp Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:40 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile This sounds very exciting. Sign me up! I'm the ideal candidate since I've never done the puzzle before. Acy On 11/22/05, spike wrote: ... So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical sudoku to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are actually measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already are at puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a puzzle-learning contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger among us will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the veteran puzzle prole? Who is in? spike _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 23 16:00:10 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:00:10 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051123010616.01d1e480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511231600.jANG0FAt024889@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Damien, > At 10:53 PM 11/22/2005 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: > > >I've been reading about 'qualia' in > >numerous posts over the years. Never could figure out > >what they were talking about. I feel better now. > > Ah, so you're experiencing the quale of "feeling better"? > > Damien Broderick Thanks Damien, what a brilliant reply! ;) Brent Allsop From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 23 16:14:22 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:14:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> "Brent Allsop" > with this theory - someone will start looking in the right > place and finally discover them (i.e. be able to reliably > predict when people are experiencing red and cause people > to experience red when they throw the switch.) But how will you know if your theory is correct, how do you test it? You can listen to the noises people make with mouth but that is not qualia, you can read the squiggles they draw with their hand, but that's not qualia either. And if you can't test it then it's not science. > It will finally solve the "problem of other minds", make > the ineffable effable, tell us what spirits are > (and are not) make Turing (and all others) seem > stupid for coming up with the Turing test as the > best way to know if something else is conscious Even you admit that we don't have such a theory now and you say the Turing Test is stupid, so I have an important question for you: Do you think I'm conscious? > Someone will realize there must be phenomenal properties > in nature in addition to causal properties. If qualia is non causal that would explain why the Turing Test can't detect it, but now we have a much more serious problem, natural selection can't detect it either. If qualia is not an inevitable byproduct of intelligence as I believe then why did evolution invent the thing? It will not be of one bit of help getting a gene into the next generation. And why does everybody think that qualia and emotions are harder to manufacture than general problem solving intelligence when evolution found the opposite to be true? Animals have behaved like they had emotions for hundreds of millions of years, and some of our strongest emotions, like fear and sex and hate come from the oldest reptilian part of our brain. Our big cerebral cortex, the part of our brain most responsible for the sort of intelligence we are proud of is a much more recent invention and is only about a million years old. I believe you could make a stronger case that computers could be conscious but they can never be intelligent rather than the other way round. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 18:02:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:02:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 23:53:40 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > From what you describe of ?Pan-psychism? here it doesn?t sound > reasonable. Certainly no less reasonable than simply positing the existence of phenomenal properties of matter that arise inexplicably in the brain but not elsewhere. Why not say they exist in all matter? Doing so simplifies the problem, and allows you to escape the hard question that you cannot answer. :) Really we are discussing two questions here: 1) how does awareness arise from seemingly "dead" matter? And, 2) how might what you call "effing" be possible? It might be possible to answer the second without answering the first. > We just know absolutely what red is like, But we don't! You know what red is like to you, I know what red is like to me, but short of a vulcan mind meld we cannot prove our experiences of red to be identical. > You must not be paying attention. When or if we discover what part of > matter, in what state, has these phenomenal properties ? we will be able > to reliably tell when someone is experiencing red or green...by causally > observing the particular correlates of matter that have those phenomenal > properties. We would be able to determine that a person is experiencing something he calls red or green, but we cannot know his actual subjective experience of the colors -- his qualia. It might be a reasonable inference that his experience matches ours but how can it be proved? For all we really know, he experiences green as red and red as green. Merry Christmas. :) -gts From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 23 18:23:55 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:23:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> John Clark, > If qualia is non causal that would explain why the Turing Test can't > detect it, Absolutely not. I never said anything remotely close to this. Phenomenal properties are most definitely causal. It's just that the causal part, is the only part that traditional cause and effect observation can detect. Beyond its causal properties - we are blind to the ineffable phenomenal properties or what they are phenomenally "like". The red strawberry is not like the green leaves. This phenomenal difference is what enables us to be aware of the situation and pick the strawberry from amongst the leaves. All this is a very causal effect in the natural world. We will never understand how this awareness works innless we fully understand the differences between red and green phenomenal properties in the brain. > Do you think I'm conscious? This is the philosophical problem of other minds. I guess that you are, for consistency and simplicity's sake - but beyond that I don't YET know for sure. But once we discover what phenomenal properties are and start sharing them - we will know for sure whether or not others are conscious like we are. Surely, some people will use different phenomenal properties to represent different information. This is proved by things like color blindness. When we can eff and/or repair the color blind person's visual perception system - they will say: "oh THAT is what it is like to experience those particular colors that I never experienced before due to my being color blind." We will finally know that they were conscious and how their consciousness was different than our own. We will have solved the problem of other minds in this way and be able to answer your question for sure. > But how will you know if your theory is correct, how do you test it? You guys must not be listing to what I am saying either that or be very unclear on the concept of what I am trying to say. Why do you keep saying this? The proof is in the effing! The ultimate absolute proof will eventually come when we join our minds together into grand unified conscious worlds (spirit worlds if you will) made of shared phenomenal properties. Right now, when I hug my wife, I am only aware of half of the phenomenal sensations. I only know what it is "like" for me. My prediction is that once we can eff, and so on, we will eventually be able to engineer ways to join our minds together (similare to the way our left and right hemisphere are joined) so that in addition to being aware of what I am feeling, I will also be aware of what she is feeling. Why is this such a difficult thing for people to grasp? If anything like this happens, this will prove that qualia exist since we will be engineering systems that use qualia to represent information like our brain does and manipulating the qualia in our own minds. After reading this, how can someone ask: "how do you test it?" > I believe you could make a stronger case that computers could be conscious > but they can never be intelligent rather than the other way round. Part of my prediction is that people like you will admit that statements like this were a stupid thing to say. Especially once you experience your first effed quale that you have never experienced before. Brent Allsop From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Nov 23 18:26:53 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:26:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? Message-ID: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> A comment on another list about the idea of "telepathic bonding" between individuals got me thinking about the advantages of such a relationship, given the (technological) capability. A form of mind-to-mind bonding between a pair of individuals would provide strong advantages in terms of (1) providing an alternate/critical viewpoint on many subjects,and (2) would provide an outside perspective on one's self. Extending to a threesome would provide the additional advantage of sure decision-making due to the tie-breaking effect of a third vote. For synergetic benefits to accrue, the individuals would need to maintain individual identities and growth to some extent. Given the availability of such bonding technology, I would expect threesomes to predominate. Questions: Has this thinking been explored in Science Fiction or other literature? Does it make sense? - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 18:23:21 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:23:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:23:55 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > The proof is in the effing! The ultimate absolute proof will > eventually come when we join our minds together into grand unified > conscious worlds (spirit worlds if you will) made of shared phenomenal > properties. And you expect this to happen within ten years? I'll take that bet. :) -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 19:03:10 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:03:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: This is a good discussion of the qualia problem in the philosophy of mind: What is it like to be a bat? http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/Nagel_Bat.html -gts From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 23 19:32:26 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:32:26 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051123193226.GF2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:03:10PM -0500, gts wrote: > This is a good discussion of the qualia problem in the philosophy of mind: > > What is it like to be a bat? > http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/Nagel_Bat.html I don't see a single lost equation in that desert of text. I don't see any neuroscience citations, in fact there is no real bibliography but a few quirky footnotes. I see a couple of sweeping claims with no evidence presented, already in the first paragraphs. I've really tried to read it, but was too disgusted to continue, so I had to quit halfway through. Sorry. (What is it like to be a bat? The question is meaningless, because it doesn't make sense, unless you're a bat, and you don't understand such questions, if you're a bat). Them philosophers are totally bat-guano. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 19:47:14 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:47:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <20051123193226.GF2249@leitl.org> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> <20051123193226.GF2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:32:26 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:03:10PM -0500, gts wrote: >> This is a good discussion of the qualia problem in the philosophy of >> mind: >> >> What is it like to be a bat? >> http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/Nagel_Bat.html > > I don't see a single lost equation in that desert of text. I don't see > any neuroscience citations Neuroscience falls under the general rubric of *physicalism* referenced several times in the article. It seems physicalism can tell us nothing about the subject. It cannot tell us what is like to be a bat, or what it is like for Brent to see the color red. "If physicalism is to be defended, the phenomenological features must themselves be given a physical account. But when we examine their subjective character it seems that such a result is impossible. The reason is that every subjective phenomenon is essentially connected with a single point of view, and it seems inevitable that an objective, physical theory [i.e., any argument from neuroscience] will abandon that point of view." Correct me if you like, Brent, but your theory seems to be physicalist, at least in so much as it seems to reject mind-body dualism. And as Nagel states here, "If physicalism is to be defended, phenomenological features must themselves be given a physical account." This what we've been asking you to do. > Them philosophers are totally bat-guano. :) But empirical science seems just as lost here. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 23 19:58:35 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 12:58:35 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511231958.jANJwZAg012689@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:23:55 -0500, Brent Allsop > wrote: > > > The proof is in the effing! The ultimate absolute proof will > > eventually come when we join our minds together into grand unified > > conscious worlds (spirit worlds if you will) made of shared phenomenal > > properties. > > And you expect this to happen within ten years? I'll take that bet. :) Oh no, I never said all that will happen by 10 years. I am only arguing that in 10 years we will have enough effing to say that whenever a particular causally observed neural correlate occurs in a brain the person will always say: "Yes, that is red." And a bit latter to perhaps have something like the first blind person that was blind since birth finally say: "Oh THAT is what red is like". Just enough physical evidence so that people commonly accept that there are phenomenal properties and so on. Then these discoveries and achievements will finally enable us to realize what is possible and cause us to embark on the goal of creating and redesigning our brains into grand unified phenomenal spirit worlds, full of our individual spirits and much more, which will of course take a bit longer. But certainly all this will happen before the Singularity which Kurzweil is arguing will happen around 2050. Another prediction of mine is that before 10 years from know a common popular phrase will develop something like: "Don't pull a Kurzweil on me!" for any time you are talking to a very smart person that is blindly missing something that should be blatantly obvious. (He is obviously so brilliant and can see so much about the future, but he has no clue about phenomenal properties, their significance, and the Turing test stupidly always plays a big part of his talk about the future.) But of course, as with all "theories" they are just that. Until we have the demonstrable effing proof, I could be the one that is mistaken as I'm sure many of you agree I am. And that is what makes it all so fun (and potentially profitable if anyone will take me up on my bet!) Brent Allsop From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 20:16:48 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:16:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511231958.jANJwZAg012689@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511231958.jANJwZAg012689@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:58:35 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: >> And you expect this to happen within ten years? I'll take that bet. :) > > Oh no, I never said all that will happen by 10 years. But as you say, the proof is in the effing. > I am only arguing that in 10 years we will have enough effing to say > that whenever a particular causally observed neural correlate occurs in > a brain the person will always say: "Yes, that is red." This would not be evidence that the evoked experience of red is universal, or that true effing had taken place. Seems to me you cannot honestly collect on the bet until your vision of a "grand unified phenomenal spirit world" comes true. -gt From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 23 20:24:49 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:24:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> <20051123193226.GF2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051123202449.GL2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:47:14PM -0500, gts wrote: > Neuroscience falls under the general rubric of *physicalism* referenced > several times in the article. Oh, it is so easy to deny reality http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trey-ellis/the-right-hasnt-cornered_b_7876.html anything that doesn't kill you immediately doesn't obviously exist. Nyah, nyah, I don't see you. Ksht. > It seems physicalism can tell us nothing about the subject. It cannot tell Right. Empirical science is totally useless, agreed. All that pesky knowledge, and the artifact trappings. Burn them all, I say. Smash them, and go back to nature. Naked, with a pointy stick, in the Serengeti. > us what is like to be a bat, or what it is like for Brent to see the color > red. It is relatively easy to make you feel how to like to be a bat, by gradually turning you into a bat (such a technology will eventually exist). Unfortunately, by turning you back into a human you will no longer remember, unless you'd settle for some fake memories (or decide to remain a bat a priori). But then, taking mind-altering drugs is much easier, so why bother? > "If physicalism is to be defended, the phenomenological features must > themselves be given a physical account. But when we examine their > subjective character it seems that such a result is impossible. The reason What does this suppose to mean? If my denial of reality is to be defended, I can be burned at a stake with a cherubic, subjective smile on my lips? > is that every subjective phenomenon is essentially connected with a single > point of view, and it seems inevitable that an objective, physical theory > [i.e., any argument from neuroscience] will abandon that point of view." I think my other shoe is a hippo. It seems, my other foot has abandoned that point of view, and is now objectively missing. > Correct me if you like, Brent, but your theory seems to be physicalist, at > least in so much as it seems to reject mind-body dualism. And as Nagel I emphatically refoot the shoe-sandal dualism as physicalist in its toe-nailture. Pedo-oral inserts > states here, "If physicalism is to be defended, phenomenological features > must themselves be given a physical account." This what we've been asking > you to do. > > >Them philosophers are totally bat-guano. > > :) But empirical science seems just as lost here. No, empirical science has no trouble tickling your brain to evoke all kind of interesting experiences. Can telling fancy stories do such stupid tricks? Thought not. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From bret at bonfireproductions.com Wed Nov 23 21:02:55 2005 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:02:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Robert Heinlein, Greg Baer, in the physical and mental. Baer's Frant species relies on multi-individual sharing because they evolved in a world continuously struck by metorites. Heinlein in the more practical and human sense, that judeo-christian values came into existence after many cultures had worked out what 'worked best' for them, i.e. not pair bonding. Of course to be more literal and specific, the US Space Shuttle uses 5 (or seven if you are picky) machines to make calculations, and the majority wins. ]3 ps - Yes it makes sense. On Nov 23, 2005, at 1:26 PM, Jef Allbright wrote: > A comment on another list about the idea of "telepathic bonding" > between individuals got me thinking about the advantages of such a > relationship, given the (technological) capability. > > A form of mind-to-mind bonding between a pair of individuals would > provide strong advantages in terms of (1) providing an > alternate/critical viewpoint on many subjects,and (2) would provide an > outside perspective on one's self. > > Extending to a threesome would provide the additional advantage of > sure decision-making due to the tie-breaking effect of a third vote. > > For synergetic benefits to accrue, the individuals would need to > maintain individual identities and growth to some extent. > > Given the availability of such bonding technology, I would expect > threesomes to predominate. > > Questions: Has this thinking been explored in Science Fiction or > other literature? Does it make sense? > > - Jef > http://www.jefallbright.net > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 23 21:03:28 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:03:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com><20051123104416.GX2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <001e01c5f071$652632a0$870d4e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > This is a good discussion of the qualia problem in the philosophy of mind: > What is it like to be a bat? > http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/Nagel_Bat.html I already know what red is like when it is being red, but I want to know what blue would be like if it were red. Tell me that and I'll tell you what it's like to be a bat. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 21:01:57 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:01:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 23:53:40 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > A camera can be ?self aware? by pointing it in a mirror. The picture it > takes of itself is information that represents itself ? hence it has > knowledge of itself or is ?self-aware?. But again this knowledge of > itself is not composed of phenomenal properties like our conscious > knowledge of ourselves is. Perhaps it's more accurate to say a camera is aware, but not self-aware. As a primitive mechanical object it lacks the ability to ponder its awareness of the images imbedded in its film. -gts From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 23 21:20:42 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:20:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jef Allbright wrote: > Extending to a threesome would provide the additional advantage of > sure decision-making due to the tie-breaking effect of a third vote. For those decisions which can only go one of two ways. (A common fallacy is to pretend that most decisions are that way, when in fact there are often third alternatives that are usually only identified if people don't rush to accept the existence of only two options.) Rough consensus is not always the same thing as democracy. From riel at surriel.com Wed Nov 23 22:15:35 2005 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:15:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051123003054.01df3700@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051123003054.01df3700@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Damien Broderick wrote: > In the tickle test, we were asked something like: find the odd man out > of apple, peach, pear, grape. I doodled around for a while with this, > before recording my initial instant reaction, that a grape grows on a > vine while all the others grow on trees. Obviously peach is the odd one out. Apple, pear and grape all have multiple small seeds inside, while peach just has one big seed ;) -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Nov 23 23:01:56 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:01:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> On 11/23/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Jef Allbright wrote: > > Extending to a threesome would provide the additional advantage of > > sure decision-making due to the tie-breaking effect of a third vote. > > For those decisions which can only go one of two ways. (A common > fallacy is to pretend that most decisions are that way, when in fact > there are often third alternatives that are usually only identified if > people don't rush to accept the existence of only two options.) Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. In the case of the three individuals, I imagine them brainstorming a list of possible actions and then ranking them via a process of binary comparisons e.g. better/worse. Does that make sense to you? > Rough consensus is not always the same thing as democracy. Sorry to mislead you, I was using the word vote in a slightly abstract sense. Weighted ranking would be preferred in many situations, and you won't often find me arguing for democracy, but that's another topic. - Jef From acy.stapp at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 23:10:37 2005 From: acy.stapp at gmail.com (Acy Stapp) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:10:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: <200511231535.jANFZqe21059@tick.javien.com> References: <200511231535.jANFZqe21059@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: Alright. I'm using the puzzles from http://www.sudoku.com.au/ since they have a good-sized free archive. I'm just starting with today's and working backward. Anyone else? Todays puzzle I solved in 23 minutes and discovered a few tricks. I also found that there are multiple answers to some puzzles, at least today's front page easy one. Acy On 11/23/05, spike wrote: > > OK do 50. Keep track of the solve times. spike > On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > > ... > So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical > sudoku > to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are > actually > measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already are at > puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a puzzle-learning > contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger among us > will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the veteran > puzzle prole? > > Who is in? > > spike > > From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 23 23:17:23 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:17:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051123231723.86366.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jef Allbright wrote: > On 11/23/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Jef Allbright wrote: > > > Extending to a threesome would provide the additional advantage > of > > > sure decision-making due to the tie-breaking effect of a third > vote. > > > > For those decisions which can only go one of two ways. (A common > > fallacy is to pretend that most decisions are that way, when in > fact > > there are often third alternatives that are usually only identified > if > > people don't rush to accept the existence of only two options.) > > Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but > it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. In a world of perfect information, yes, they could be. The problem is that some commonly-used methods of perception tend to blind one to certain options - in other words, one does not realize that certain decisions can be made. Ironically, the very act of seeking to reduce everything to binary decisions can itself be one of these methods - not because of any theoretical impossibility, but simply because the number of decisions that a multi-way decision turns into is unwieldly large, and therefore human actors dismiss or do not investigate arbitrary sets of them - with corresponding arbitrarily poorer-than-optimal results. > In > the case of the three individuals, I imagine them brainstorming a > list > of possible actions and then ranking them via a process of binary > comparisons e.g. better/worse. They could, but that's often inefficient - and there is a natural tendency in many peoples' decision making processes to optimize for short-term time (including time spent on the decision itself), which is sometimes good and sometimes bad. > > Rough consensus is not always the same thing as democracy. > > Sorry to mislead you, I was using the word vote in a slightly > abstract > sense. Weighted ranking would be preferred in many situations, and > you won't often find me arguing for democracy, but that's another > topic. The "rough consensus" process means that, instead of voting or ranking which one is the best option (except as a last resort - which is sometimes necessary), the parties first try to explore and resolve any conflicts in data or modelling that cause the various parties to vote for or rank things differently in the first place. (If everyone turns out to desire the same choice, then the choice becomes obvious, and everyone gets things to go as they want. Extending this analogy to a simple - if practically impossible - extreme, imagine if, come the next US presidential elections, as a result of the debates and campaigning every voter in America sincerely agreed on the same candidate.) From joel.pitt at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 23:32:18 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:32:18 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <20051123231723.86366.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> <20051123231723.86366.qmail@web81602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/24/05, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but > > it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. > > In a world of perfect information, yes, they could be. The problem is > that some commonly-used methods of perception tend to blind one to > certain options - in other words, one does not realize that certain > decisions can be made. Ironically, the very act of seeking to reduce > everything to binary decisions can itself be one of these methods - not > because of any theoretical impossibility, but simply because the number > of decisions that a multi-way decision turns into is unwieldly large, > and therefore human actors dismiss or do not investigate arbitrary sets > of them - with corresponding arbitrarily poorer-than-optimal results. I would argue that human actors do consider an huge number of decisions, however most of the decisions are subconscious and only those with sufficient relevence present themselves to the a human actors conscious mind. -Joel From acy.stapp at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 04:18:36 2005 From: acy.stapp at gmail.com (Acy Stapp) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:18:36 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: As a probably off-topic side note, I recall that there is a 1000:1 variation in ability to smell between different humans, and women have an uncanny ability to detect extremely minute amounts of particular smells (such as ammonia, perfume, etc) that men do not have. That's all I've got. All this theorizing on consciousness has me in the mood of angels dancing on a pin. On 11/23/05, BillK wrote: > > On 11/23/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > Why? Has red ever changed during your life > > time? Has salty? Have you ever confused red > > (the A qualia) with green (the B qualia) or > > salty? Red is and always will be red ? no > > confusion whatsoever and we always know very > > reliably that A is like A and not like B. > > > > Sure, taste is a bit more nebulous and fleeting > > and obviously people taste things very > > differently (represent the same chemical content > > of food with different quale) ? To me that simply > > says we should focus on the plain, simple, and > > constant ones, like color, first and an > > understanding of the others will follow. > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 04:45:36 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:15:36 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: References: <200511231535.jANFZqe21059@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511232045x17168260s@mail.gmail.com> You will spoil the experiment if you go sharing what you've learnt on the list! Whoops, sorry for the violence. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) On 24/11/05, Acy Stapp wrote: > Alright. I'm using the puzzles from http://www.sudoku.com.au/ since > they have a good-sized free archive. I'm just starting with today's > and working backward. Anyone else? Todays puzzle I solved in 23 > minutes and discovered a few tricks. I also found that there are > multiple answers to some puzzles, at least today's front page easy > one. > > Acy > > On 11/23/05, spike wrote: > > > > OK do 50. Keep track of the solve times. spike > > On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > > > > ... > > So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical > > sudoku > > to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are > > actually > > measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already are at > > puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a puzzle-learning > > contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger among us > > will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the veteran > > puzzle prole? > > > > Who is in? > > > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 04:52:23 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:52:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511221507s5c37de06l9ce6ebc707a21399@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511222151.jAMLph5b024695@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <22360fa10511221507s5c37de06l9ce6ebc707a21399@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:07:54 -0500, Jef Allbright wrote: I've been thinking about your interesting line of thought here, Jef, and trying to see how it applies to the question of qualia. I'm thinking it's an interesting answer to the question of ego and self-image but that it doesn't apply to the question of qualia. Qualia are about immediate sense experience, not about mental constructs such as the concept of self. When you look at a red stoplight, for example, you experience a color. That immediate experience of the color red has certain characteristics to you separate from any concepts you may or may not have about your self in the world. It's probable that lower organisms experience qualia with no concept of self. Insects probably "see things" (experience qualia) even if they have no concept of self and no ability to reflect intelligently on their observations. However the abstract concept of self may very well be an evolutionary adaptation exactly as you describe here. Maybe even worth a separate thread! > Brent, have you considered turning the question around--and assuming a > universe that has no "phenomenal properties"--what it might be like > for organisms that evolved the capability to model their surroundings > as many primitive organisms do, and then took the next step and began > to include themselves in the model for the additional fitness this > enhanced model provided? > > If such a theory accounted for all the observations, including an > organism that would know and feel an immediate and indisputable sense > of itself within its surroundings, then wouldn't that theory be > preferable to one that requires some additional and mysterious > "phenomenal properties"? > Taking it up a level, could you also imagine how in this purely > physical model, that a self-aware organism, evolved to protect its > "self" at all cost, may find it nearly impossible to expand its > concept of its world such that its "self" --its own special > viewpoint--really isn't anything special in any measurable, objective > sense? > > I realize that the foregoing is rife with loopholes and tempting > distractions. If you're up to it, I suggest only that you might play > with such an impersonal and heartlessly objective scenario for a while > and see where it takes you. Some people have, and have found it > similar to going into the void and emerging on the other side with all > as it was before, only more so. > > - Jef From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 24 05:49:08 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:49:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051124054908.91764.qmail@web81610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Joel Peter William Pitt wrote: > I would argue that human actors do consider an huge number of > decisions, however most of the decisions are subconscious and only > those with sufficient relevence present themselves to the a human > actors conscious mind. Huge != infinite. Just because one processes a huge number of decisions subconsciously does not mean that one processes all relevant decisions, or even that all relevant decisions suggest themselves (or, if there are enough of them, that they can all be processed in a given finite amount of time). And, at least speaking for my own mind, it's certainly not the case that only things that are completely relevant to the decision at hand are processed by the conscious mind. From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 24 06:43:13 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:43:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> "Brent Allsop" > Phenomenal properties are most definitely causal. Then the Turing Test should work. >It's just that the causal part, is the only part that traditional > cause and effect observation can detect. Ok let's talk about the non causal part, the part that you think is so important. I'm going to repeat what I said before because you didn't respond to it and I think it's an absolutely devastating criticism: If Natural Selection can't see it how can Natural Selection select for it? > I guess that you are [conscious] , for consistency and simplicity's sake Consciousness is simple? I think you are talking gibberish. You admit you have no theory of consciousness and if the Turing Test really is stupid as you say then there is absolutely no reason to believe I'm any more conscious than a rock. But of course in the real world you do believe I'm conscious, you believe it very very strongly, you believe it as strongly as you believe anything in the world. Well OK, that's not entirely true, you only believe it when I'm awake because I ACT THAT WAY, you don't believe that I'm conscious when I'm asleep or knocked out or dead because I ACT THAT WAY. So is the Turing Test really stupid? I think not. John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 24 07:13:36 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:13:36 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:43 AM 11/24/2005 -0500, John K Clark wrote: >"Brent Allsop" > >>Phenomenal properties are most definitely causal. > >Then the Turing Test should work. > >>It's just that the causal part, is the only part that traditional >>cause and effect observation can detect. > >Ok let's talk about the non causal part, the part that you think is so >important. I'm going to repeat what I said before because you didn't respond >to it and I think it's an absolutely devastating criticism: If Natural >Selection can't see it how can Natural Selection select for it? I have no reason to suppose that phenomenological aspects of reality--the experience of self and world, however compromised, mediated and partial--are acausal or intrinsically mysterious. But the best science assures us that at the deepest levels of reality, quantum events are simply stochastic: they don't just look random, they *are* random, one by one (something John has noted in other posts). Everything built from them is thus riddled with acausality, so natural selection has no option but to include this feature of the world. If somehow acausality then re-emerges at the macro level, and is useful for survival, as I think Penrose would assert, then evolution will conserve the genomes that happen to concentrate and utilize this trick. That's my guess, anyway. Of course, maybe (even probably) there is no such high-level acausality, or maybe if there is it has nothing to do with human experience. But the idea doesn't seem to me ridiculous on its face. Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Thu Nov 24 07:54:23 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:54:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000401c5f0cc$49a23910$3bbe1b97@administxl09yj> Damien wrote: > [...] at the deepest levels of reality, > quantum events are simply stochastic: > they don't just look random, > they *are* random, one by one [...] One by one, yes, 'single' events are random. > Everything built from them is > thus riddled with acausality, > so natural selection has no option but > to include this feature of the world. The problem here, maybe, is how to define 'causality' and 'a-causality'. It is not so easy since, in general, such a definition involves 'time', at least for 'single' events. But time is just a parameter, a pre-condition 'we' impose, it is our clock-time. It is not sure that - at a fundamental microlevel - there is such a time, or such a space-time. > Of course, maybe (even probably) there is > no such high-level acausality, or maybe > if there is it has nothing to do > with human experience. But the idea doesn't seem > to me ridiculous on its face. Part of that a-causality arises, at the micro-level, for single events, because there is a coexistence between something extended, non-local, and also contextual ('waves' or fields of any kinds), and something local ('quanta' emitted, 'quanta' absorbed). But I do not know if there is something similar at a higher level. From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 07:59:34 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 02:59:34 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 02:13:36 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > I have no reason to suppose that phenomenological aspects of > reality--the experience of self and world, however compromised, mediated > and partial--are acausal or intrinsically mysterious. Like you I have no reason to think qualia are acausal. But are they intrinsically mysterious? I think so! > But the best science assures us that at the deepest levels of reality, > quantum events... QM goes to the question of causality but not to the question of how to understand qualia. Consider a computerized robotic digital camera. It has a mechanism to analyze its digital records and a speaker through which to report its observations. It takes a snapshot of the color red, analyzes it to determine the wavelengths of light that created its digital record, then reports through its speaker, "I see the color red". Intelligent though this cameras may be, I think most people would say it did not actually experience the 'red' quale. You and I know what red "looks like" (the qualia) but the camera was just doing mathematical computations. It never really experienced redness. Or did it? -gts From eugen at leitl.org Thu Nov 24 08:13:30 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:13:30 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 02:59:34AM -0500, gts wrote: > Intelligent though this cameras may be, I think most people would say it > did not actually experience the 'red' quale. Why? Do you need to be a human to see red? Do chimps qualify? Insects? Bacteria? Recognizing a specific wavelength range is a really simple measurement. A single molecule could do it. > You and I know what red "looks like" (the qualia) but the camera was just > doing mathematical computations. It never really experienced redness. Or You did not actually see red. A photon hit a transmembrane pigment and caused a depolarization, which resulted in a spike cascade. It was just some atom choreography. "You" "did" "not" "actually" "see" "red". Computers can't actually play chess. Industrial robots don't actually work, they only simulate it. Silly, ain't it? > did it? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 08:36:51 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 03:36:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 03:13:30 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > Recognizing a specific wavelength range is a really simple measurement. > A single molecule could do it. Yes, this is what I mean by pan-psychism. Right or wrong, it simplifies the problem. Consider a definition of awareness that entails only a response to the environment. If a molecule (or atom or particle) changes in any way in response to any stimulus then it is defined as "aware" of that stimulus. If this is the definition of awareness then there is nothing especially mysterious about human awareness. No need for magic or dualism. Humans (and probably other higher animals) are special only because we have extra neurological equipment that allows us to be aware our awareness. Neurons looking at neurons. -gts From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Thu Nov 24 09:40:55 2005 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (david) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:40:55 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> Jef Allbright wrote: >Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but >it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. In >the case of the three individuals, I imagine them brainstorming a list >of possible actions and then ranking them via a process of binary >comparisons e.g. better/worse. > >Does that make sense to you? > > > Would you like a chocolate, strawberry or vanilla icecream ? From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Nov 24 09:44:02 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:44:02 -0800 Subject: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat] In-Reply-To: References: <200511220408.jAM48Ne15724@tick.javien.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051123003054.01df3700@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <268EA800-5924-4BD9-B369-ABA4DD0C46C9@mac.com> I picked grape because it was the only one that grew in a bunch/cluster. On Nov 23, 2005, at 2:15 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Damien Broderick wrote: > > >> In the tickle test, we were asked something like: find the odd man >> out >> of apple, peach, pear, grape. I doodled around for a while with this, >> before recording my initial instant reaction, that a grape grows on a >> vine while all the others grow on trees. >> > > Obviously peach is the odd one out. Apple, pear and grape > all have multiple small seeds inside, while peach just has > one big seed ;) > > -- > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 10:03:04 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 05:03:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 04:40:55 -0500, david wrote: > Jef Allbright wrote: > >> it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form... >> Does that make sense to you? >> > Would you like a chocolate, strawberry or vanilla icecream ? Jef's idea makes sense to me: For me, considering chocolate, strawberry or vanilla... chocolate vs stawberry = chocolate chocolate vs vanilla = chocolate stawberry vs vanilla = vanilla Chocolate wins 2/3. All binary. I often think this way. -gts From joel.pitt at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 10:43:49 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Pitt) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 23:43:49 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <43859965.1000704@gmail.com> david wrote: > Jef Allbright wrote: > >> Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but >> it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. In >> the case of the three individuals, I imagine them brainstorming a list >> of possible actions and then ranking them via a process of binary >> comparisons e.g. better/worse. >> >> Does that make sense to you? >> >> >> > Would you like a chocolate, strawberry or vanilla icecream ? The simplest answer of course is "Yes" ("Tea or coffee?", "Yes please!"). -Joel -- What a strange machine man is. You fill him with bread, wine, fish, and radishes, and out come sighs, laughter and dreams. - Nikos Kazantzakis From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 12:22:50 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:52:50 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511240422t6580d88q@mail.gmail.com> On 24/11/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 03:13:30 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > Recognizing a specific wavelength range is a really simple measurement. > > A single molecule could do it. > > Yes, this is what I mean by pan-psychism. Right or wrong, it simplifies > the problem. > > Consider a definition of awareness that entails only a response to the > environment. If a molecule (or atom or particle) changes in any way in > response to any stimulus then it is defined as "aware" of that stimulus. > > If this is the definition of awareness then there is nothing especially > mysterious about human awareness. No need for magic or dualism. But this is exactly dualism, because you are proposing an "awareness" that doesn't need to be there for the mechanism to work, and yet is. And somehow, it can interact with the world (so that the one neuron can be aware of the awareness of another), effecting change in neurons, while not being composed of matter/energy. So somehow the telephone works even though the plug is pulled out of the wall. > Humans > (and probably other higher animals) are special only because we have extra > neurological equipment that allows us to be aware our awareness. Neurons > looking at neurons. > > -gts > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 38211 (http://nanowrimo.org) From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 14:01:52 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:01:52 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Internet: a commie, socialist conspiracy! In-Reply-To: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> References: <002801c5ef5c$10cb0f20$a7830d0a@JPAcer> Message-ID: On 11/22/05, Jack Parkinson wrote: > > Some interesting observations and opinions from Slate magazine. In a world > ruled by profit-focused business - the Internet could never have arisen... > > Full story see: http://www.slate.com/id/2130798 > Two short snips: > > "This month, SAP's Shai Agassi referred to open-source software as > "intellectual property socialism." In January, Bill Gates suggested that > free-software developers are communists. A few years earlier, Microsoft > CEO > Steve Ballmer called the open-source operating system Linux "a cancer." > Considering what these guys say in public, I wonder what dark words they > utter in private-that al-Qaida uses open-source software to plot terrorist > attacks?" I wonder what they are going to say if/when Negraponte's $100 laptop goes into mass production? It sure won't be running Windows, and if it runs Linux then the latter could move to snatch the top position from MS in the overall personal market. That could be a huge blow to MS. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 24 14:20:55 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:20:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <22360fa10511240620u4cbf463ay8e40ccf305487865@mail.gmail.com> On 11/24/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 04:40:55 -0500, david wrote: > > > Jef Allbright wrote: > > > >> it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form... > >> Does that make sense to you? > >> > > Would you like a chocolate, strawberry or vanilla icecream ? > > Jef's idea makes sense to me: > > For me, considering chocolate, strawberry or vanilla... > > chocolate vs stawberry = chocolate > chocolate vs vanilla = chocolate > stawberry vs vanilla = vanilla > > Chocolate wins 2/3. All binary. > > I often think this way. Right idea, except only two comparison actions were required, not three. - Jef From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 15:01:52 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:01:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511240620u4cbf463ay8e40ccf305487865@mail.gmail.com> References: <22360fa10511231026j62cd5e3bp18d1c62236225558@mail.gmail.com> <20051123212042.2330.qmail@web81611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <22360fa10511231501w4ee905acyd806fb39de504c38@mail.gmail.com> <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> <22360fa10511240620u4cbf463ay8e40ccf305487865@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: >> Chocolate wins 2/3. All binary. >> >> I often think this way. > > Right idea, except only two comparison actions were required, not three. I was also ranking them: chocolate better than vanilla better than strawberry. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 15:07:50 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:07:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511240422t6580d88q@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <710b78fc0511240422t6580d88q@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:22:50 -0500, Emlyn wrote: >> If this is the definition of awareness then there is nothing especially >> mysterious about human awareness. No need for magic or dualism. > > But this is exactly dualism, because you are proposing an "awareness" > that doesn't need to be there for the mechanism to work, and yet is. Dualism implies something ghostly and non-physical. -gts From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 24 15:20:56 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:20:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> On 11/24/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 03:13:30 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > Recognizing a specific wavelength range is a really simple measurement. > > A single molecule could do it. > > Yes, this is what I mean by pan-psychism. Right or wrong, it simplifies > the problem. Oh, you were soooo close. You locked in on the point where contradiction arises...and then smoothed it out. Pan-psychism is like Borges' Library of Babel, which contains all knowledge--randomly located with the random sequences on its pages. It is like the Truth of the mystic who finally, at long last, has arrived at the point where there are no more questions...because he has stopped asking. And pan-psychism is such a wonderful idea, full of potential...but doesn't correlate with any empirical observations and doesn't sharpen our understanding--we can't cut with it. When you find your way back to that point, where you're asking about the system "just" doing calculations, and whether it really "experienced" anything, then ask yourself how you would know--or better yet, how would it know? A key to this puzzle is that, as material systems in a material world, "we" only know what we are experiencing via interrogating that very same system...one view of which is labeled "Self". - Jef From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 16:00:41 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:00:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:20:56 -0500, Jef Allbright wrote: > When you find your way back to that point, where you're asking about > the system "just" doing calculations, and whether it really > "experienced" anything, then ask yourself how you would know--or > better yet, how would it know? If we're trying to understand qualia then the ability to "know what we are experiencing" is really a different question and beside the point. Higher organisms are interested in reflecting on the nature of themselves and their qualia, because as you point out in another message, that modeling of their environment with self included gives them an advantage. Lower organisms probably just live by experience (qualia) and blind instinct. I doubt flies know they are alive or that they experience the world. They seem to experience qualia without having a self-concept and without having knowledge of their own existence. Aside from mobility, blind instinct, and the ability to replicate, I wonder how an insect is in any way different from a camera. I wonder if there is no difference. If there is no difference then pan-psychism is true. -gts From eugen at leitl.org Thu Nov 24 16:50:14 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:50:14 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051124165014.GC2249@leitl.org> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 11:00:41AM -0500, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:20:56 -0500, Jef Allbright > wrote: > > >When you find your way back to that point, where you're asking about > >the system "just" doing calculations, and whether it really > >"experienced" anything, then ask yourself how you would know--or > >better yet, how would it know? > > If we're trying to understand qualia then the ability to "know what we are > experiencing" is really a different question and beside the point. Higher No, it is precisely the point. Measuring a physical observable is different from system measuring representation of an observable within itself. A molecule can measure a photon wavelength. But it can't observe itself making that measurement. You need more computational hardware for that. Making decisions based on said measurement takes more resources still. Generating coded statements about such and transmitting them across a spherical matter assembly in its own gravitational trap to similiarly structured systems takes more resources still. Obviously, no molecule (nor bat) can do such. > organisms are interested in reflecting on the nature of themselves and > their qualia, because as you point out in another message, that modeling > of their environment with self included gives them an advantage. > > Lower organisms probably just live by experience (qualia) and blind > instinct. That's an assertion presented as fact. All organisms represent their environments. Depending on their complexity, the accuracy of that model varies. However, regardless how that model is represented, it is there, and the system makes measurements and makes decisions affecting its future fate, regardless whether it's Heidegger or a lowly E. coli tumbling through food gradients. > I doubt flies know they are alive or that they experience the world. They So now contain the richness of model description, too? > seem to experience qualia without having a self-concept and without having > knowledge of their own existence. You're contradicting yourself. Your is a naked measurement, then suddenly the next moment it's the whole enchilada, the whole primate experience bundled in. > Aside from mobility, blind instinct, and the ability to replicate, I > wonder how an insect is in any way different from a camera. I wonder if > there is no difference. If there is no difference then pan-psychism is > true. Are you sure you're not a Martian? You make about as much sense. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 24 16:56:28 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:56:28 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> On 11/24/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:20:56 -0500, Jef Allbright > wrote: > > > When you find your way back to that point, where you're asking about > > the system "just" doing calculations, and whether it really > > "experienced" anything, then ask yourself how you would know--or > > better yet, how would it know? > > If we're trying to understand qualia then the ability to "know what we are > experiencing" is really a different question and beside the point. Higher > organisms are interested in reflecting on the nature of themselves and > their qualia, because as you point out in another message, that modeling > of their environment with self included gives them an advantage. > > Lower organisms probably just live by experience (qualia) and blind > instinct. > > I doubt flies know they are alive or that they experience the world. They > seem to experience qualia without having a self-concept and without having > knowledge of their own existence. What could you possibly mean by saying that you think flies don't experience the world but do experience qualia? Could you, please, try to elucidate that claim? If it doesn't seem coherent to you either, then please just say so. I must admit that I have a hard time even keeping a placeholder in my mind for the concept of qualia. That goes for similar popular concepts such as "free will", a discrete and continuous "self", "morality", etc., but for these other concepts I'm able to make a kind of translation to some form of operational description. With "qualia" as generally used it's hard to know what operational description would have any effect, and when you make a statement such as the one above, I can't conceive of even a moderately coherent mental framework that would support it. I am fascinated by what seems to be an insurmountable gap between those who prefer the subjective and those who prefer the objective approach to describing "reality". I have ideas as to how this might be overcome, but let's continue along the current path a little further. > Aside from mobility, blind instinct, and the ability to replicate, I > wonder how an insect is in any way different from a camera. I wonder if > there is no difference. I would agree that each of these systems responds to its environment and that neither has self-awareness. It could be said that only one of these has the attribute of agency, but I don't know if that's relevant to the point you're trying to make. > If there is no difference then pan-psychism is true. Huh?! Please fill in the steps in your reasoning here. - Jef From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 17:34:14 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:34:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:56:28 -0500, Jef Allbright wrote: > What could you possibly mean by saying that you think flies don't > experience the world but do experience qualia? That's not what I wrote, Jef. I think flies *do* experience the world, that flies *do* experience qualia. Presumably flies can see. They have eyes to see, after all. But I doubt flies have an ability to reflect consciously on themselves and their experiences. I doubt flies ask themselves "What is that I saw?" Their supposed mental processes and models are just blind instinct, probably simple rules that could in principle be programmed into a microchip. If I'm right then how is a fly different in any important way from a camera? If there is no real difference then why not say all matter is aware, though not necessarily self-aware? i.e, that pan-psychism is true? It is then a simple step to understanding more advanced awareness and self-awareness. Self-awareness would be a case of aware matter becoming aware of itself. No need for the dualistic ghost in the machine. > I must admit that I have a hard time even keeping a placeholder in my > mind for the concept of qualia. Hold a piece of red paper in front of your eyes. Close your eyes, then open them. The difference in your experience upon opening your eyes is the red quale. -gts From eugen at leitl.org Thu Nov 24 17:53:46 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:53:46 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051124175346.GG2249@leitl.org> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 12:34:14PM -0500, gts wrote: > But I doubt flies have an ability to reflect consciously on themselves and Another one of those noise words you use so effortlessly. What is consciousness? It doesn't resolve to anything well-defined over here. > their experiences. I doubt flies ask themselves "What is that I saw?" > Their supposed mental processes and models are just blind instinct, Why "blind instinct"? These flies can see just fine. They can react. They can learn. So are you saying that flies can or cannot distinguish photons by wavelength? > probably simple rules that could in principle be programmed into a > microchip. In principle, *you* could be programmed into a microchip. Except that it wouldn't be a chip, and it would be pretty macro. Even the lowly fly has more crunch than your average Blue Gene box. Never, ever understimate the intelligence of a fly. > If I'm right then how is a fly different in any important way from a > camera? If I'm right then how are you different from in any important way from a fly? The complexity delta is about the same, after all. > If there is no real difference then why not say all matter is aware, > though not necessarily self-aware? i.e, that pan-psychism is true? It is > then a simple step to understanding more advanced awareness and > self-awareness. Self-awareness would be a case of aware matter becoming > aware of itself. No need for the dualistic ghost in the machine. > > >I must admit that I have a hard time even keeping a placeholder in my > >mind for the concept of qualia. He's not alone here, you know. > Hold a piece of red paper in front of your eyes. Close your eyes, then > open them. The difference in your experience upon opening your eyes is the > red quale. So it takes some 100 ms of processing time of a physical system labelled "Jeff". That's a quite awful way to start defining a measurement. So, again, what's the lowest complexity level of a system that can't quale for sure? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 24 18:04:01 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:04:01 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:34 PM 11/24/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >If I'm right then how is a fly different in any important way from a >camera? > >If there is no real difference then why not say all matter is aware, >though not necessarily self-aware? Frankly, I find this fucking ludicrous, akin to saying: "This newspaper photograph of George Bush is made up of many small dots of various sizes, hence all dots are pictures of George Bush." All rocks possess eeny-teeny bits of awareness, eh? Yes, and every rock has a sense of humor (despite its stony face), every squishy fragment of toothpaste has a gleaming smile, all gas aspires to the condition of music. Damien Broderick From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 24 18:37:06 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:37:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> I'm going to respectfully withdraw from the discussion at this time because it has gone well beyond the point of diminishing returns and I don't see any effective near-term method for increasing understanding. The gap itself is very interesting to me, and I think it hinges on a early developmental preference for either the subjective or objective basis in one's approach to describing the world, compounded by semantic ambiguity and cultural biases. It seems to be an increasingly relevant and important issue because accelerating technology is forcing us to improve our understanding and application of (broadening) objective knowledge in the service of our (broadening) subjective goals, or to become irrelevant ourselves. - Jef From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Nov 24 18:52:26 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:52:26 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051124125139.02f54da0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 12:04 PM 11/24/2005, Damien wrote: >All rocks possess eeny-teeny bits of awareness, eh? Yes, and every rock >has a sense of humor (despite its stony face), every squishy fragment of >toothpaste has a gleaming smile, all gas aspires to the condition of music. Beautiful! Hahaha! Just what I needed for Thanksgiving day!! Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 18:50:15 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:50:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:04:01 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > Frankly, I find this fucking ludicrous Perhaps you have a better explanation. How do you resolve the problem Brent's view presents? He believes matter in the brain has "phenomenal properties" and that this explains sense perception. Why/how is that matter different from matter outside the brain? > All rocks possess eeny-teeny bits of awareness, eh? If the most basic level of awareness is about simply responding to the environment, then yes. Throw a rock on the pavement and watch it break -- nothing mysterious or mystical about it. More complex objects have more complex responses. The most complex can replicate themselves, and if they have sense organs they can act and react in very complex ways. > Yes, and every rock has a sense of humor I am a big squishy complex rock, a composite of water and various other compounds, and sometimes I laugh. :) The distinction between living and non-living objects seems pretty arbitrary. I've often wondered why people sometimes think viruses are alive. A virus is nothing more than a rock-like container of genetic material, not much different from a grain of sand. -gts From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 24 18:56:27 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:56:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Threesome as most efficient social arrangement? In-Reply-To: <43858AA7.9060900@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20051124185627.68369.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- david wrote: > Jef Allbright wrote: > >Maybe I'm pretending to know something about information theory, but > >it seems to me that all decisions can be reduced to binary form. In > >the case of the three individuals, I imagine them brainstorming a > list > >of possible actions and then ranking them via a process of binary > >comparisons e.g. better/worse. > > > >Does that make sense to you? > > > Would you like a chocolate, strawberry or vanilla icecream ? Raspberry sherbert. :P From jonkc at att.net Thu Nov 24 21:34:25 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:34:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> "Damien Broderick" > Everything built from them is thus riddled with acausality, so natural > selection has no option but to include this feature of the world. If > somehow acausality then re-emerges at the macro level, and is useful for > survival, as I think Penrose would assert, then evolution will conserve > the genomes that happen to concentrate and utilize this trick. It's not just Penrose that asserts that, every biologist does, they assert that the two things that make Evolution work are: 1) Random (effects without a cause) mutation 2) Natural selection. If the Turing Test can detect intelligence but not consciousness then we must have a gene that manufactures qualia but doesn't do anything else, it can't effect behavior or the test would work. We might value such a gene a great deal but to Natural Selection it's useless, in fact to Natural Selection it's invisible. Even if the gene came about by a lucky chance like a tornado in a junkyard assembling a 747 it would soon atrophy away after a few generations as the eyes of cave fish do. In short if Turing doesn't work then we have a gene that only makes qualia but Evolution could never provide such a gene therefore I conclude Turing does work for consciousness. Good think too because every single person on this list uses it every single day of their lives. John K Clark From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 23:29:12 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:59:12 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> On 25/11/05, Jef Allbright wrote: > The gap itself is very interesting to me, and I think it hinges on a > early developmental preference for either the subjective or objective > basis in one's approach to describing the world, compounded by > semantic ambiguity and cultural biases. > > - Jef Here is someone who has changed camps. I used to be a big supporter of the qualia concept (there's probably quite a bit in the archives if one were to dig). But I find myself in the materialist camp these days, because I can't find any support at all for the theory of qualia, only big holes. And of course, I feel as though I "experience" qualia in that indefinable subjective way (I'm wearing a red t-shirt right now). But given the shakiness of the concept when examined in detail, and the basic fact that the human brain seems to be architected on the basis of bullshitting itself at every possible turn, I view that subjective experience with suspicion, to put it mildly. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 38211 (http://nanowrimo.org) From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Thu Nov 24 23:43:12 2005 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:43:12 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gambling win as Betfair gets past the post Message-ID: <075201c5f150$d58f6770$8998e03c@homepc> http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17357050%255E2702,00.html "AUSTRALIAN punters will be able to legally bet against each other online within weeks, after Tasmania's upper house yesterday approved a licensing regime for betting exchanges. Independents in the state's Legislative Council passed the Lennon Labor Government's legislation paving the way for the British-based Betfair to get a licence to operate in Australia. " ---- Most of the opposition to this seemed to focus on the idea that it was inherently more dangerous and risky to allow punters to bet that a particular horse would loose rather than that some other horse would beat it. There was a lot of politiking inevitably going on as vested racing interests sought to protect their revenue streams. I'm not entirely sure though that there isn't a slight case to be made that it would be easier to sabotage the performance of a particular horse making it lose. I'm thinking about doping and the difficulties of screening drugs etc in modern athletes. If the stakes are high enough perhaps it wouldn't be too hard to impair the performance of a particular racing animal. Brett Paatsch From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 00:46:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:46:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:29:12 -0500, Emlyn wrote: > But given the shakiness of the concept when examined in detail, and the > basic fact that the human brain seems to be architected on the basis > of bullshitting itself at every possible turn, I view that subjective > experience with suspicion, to put it mildly. Yet you acknowlege the experience. That experience *is* qualia, no matter how we choose to think about it. If the human brain is a machine then it should be possible to build a machine that experiences qualia. Some would say this is the essence of strong AI. This is what Brent envisions also. The question is how do we build that machine. I think it would be helpful if we understood what the hell we're talking about when we talk about qualia. :) Whatever it is, it's staring us right in the face. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 01:27:37 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:27:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051124165014.GC2249@leitl.org> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <20051124165014.GC2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:50:14 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > A molecule can measure a photon wavelength. Yes. > But it can't observe itself making that measurement. Right, that would require self-awareness. I'm not suggesting molecules are self-aware, just aware. Robotic insects already exist. I wonder if they are in any fundamental way different from real insects. Other than the difference in materials, and the ability to mate and reproduce, aren't they basically the same as real insects? If not, exactly how are they different? To me insects look like little flying cameras. -gts From marc.geddes at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 02:32:04 2005 From: marc.geddes at gmail.com (Marc Geddes) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:32:04 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet Message-ID: <7a5e56060511241832t721b414cod910281abc02e3aa@mail.gmail.com> There are three possibilities as regards the 'qualia' question: (1) Qualia are a separate substance which can exist independently of the material world (substance dualism) (2) 'Qualia' is simply a misnomer - all that exists are physical processes (materialism) (3) 'Qualia' themselves are not physical, but they are entirely *caused by* and *dependent on* physical processes (non-reductive physicalism) (1) Seems to have been largely ruled out by modern science but options (2) and (3) are still very much alive. Daniel Dennett would be an example of someone who champions (2), David Chalmers an example of someone who champions (3). --- As regards bets on qualia, in an earlier thread) and threw out my idea for future historians. --- Of course, I believe in option (3). I'm sure that whilst qualia are *generated by* physical processes, qualia themselves are not material. My solution to the qualia puzzle was that time is three dimensional and consciousness is simply a process on a 'higher dimensional' time-line. This certainly has everyone around the transhumanist lists thinking I'm a nut and a crank. None the less, it seems perfectly obvious to me at least that time is indeed three dimensional. So either I'm gonna get seriously 'cream pied' as one of the lists biggest arses/cranks, or I'm gonna go down as the guy that gave a correct answer to the qualia puzzle in my spare time using only intuition, where 2000 years of scientists and philosophers before me failed :D Before I was playing puzzles as a game. This time I'm playing for the entire observable universe. How's that for high stakes? ;) My advise: Always bet on Geddes. -- To see a World in a grain of sand, And Heaven in a wild flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. -William Blake Please visit my web-site: http://www.riemannai.org/ Sci-Fi, Science and Fantasy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From analyticphilosophy at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 03:00:35 2005 From: analyticphilosophy at gmail.com (Jeff Medina) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:00:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment Message-ID: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> I come across a lot of people equivocating randomness in a colloquial sense of "random mutations" with indeterminism or acausality (i.e., they take "a random effect" to mean "an effect without a cause"). If this is purely linguistic, feel free to ignore this message, with the minor request that we make an effort to stop using these terms interchangeably; it promotes public confusion about various areas of science, like evolution. In case it's conceptual, please note that no "random mutation" in evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." They are mutations *without a known cause* (in most cases) and *without a goal or purpose*. This is very different, and claiming mutations are totally without cause contributes to public intuition against the plausibility of mutations leading to anything useful, among other conceptual muddles. Contemporary physics indicates two main possibilities. (1) Almost *no* physical processes are acausal. This is if certain quantum events are acausal, as some physicists suspect or assume. (2) No physical processes at all are acausal - not even at the quantum level. The possibility of determinism at the quantum level without requiring hidden variables or any of that is argued by t'Hooft, for example. -- Jeff Medina http://www.painfullyclear.com/ Community Director Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ Relationships & Community Fellow Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies http://www.ieet.org/ School of Philosophy, Birkbeck, University of London http://www.bbk.ac.uk/phil/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 25 03:07:11 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 21:07:11 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.co m> References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124210539.01e6a2a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:00 PM 11/24/2005 -0500, Jeff Medina wrote: >please note that no "random mutation" in >evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." They are >mutations *without a known cause* (in most cases) and *without a goal >or purpose*. This is very different Indeed it is, and thanks for spelling this out. I would have done so, but I've got a Thanksgiving cold and couldn't be bothered. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 25 03:45:13 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:45:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051125034514.51503.qmail@web81606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jeff Medina wrote: > I come across a lot of people equivocating randomness in a colloquial > sense of "random mutations" with indeterminism or acausality (i.e., > they take "a random effect" to mean "an effect without a cause"). If > this is purely linguistic, feel free to ignore this message, with the > minor request that we make an effort to stop using these terms > interchangeably; it promotes public confusion about various areas of > science, like evolution. > > In case it's conceptual, please note that no "random mutation" in > evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." They are > mutations *without a known cause* (in most cases) and *without a goal > or purpose*. This spreads to the generic use of "random", and indeed to the very concept of that which is known. Many people think that reality consists only of exactly what we know (like established science), and of that which we can never know (like, as many of them would phrase it, God's mind). This attitude is of course trivial to prove false - any new discovery suffices, and we're making new discoveries all the time these days - but it persists. In the mean time, of course anything that anyone says is always only ever to the best of their knowledge (unless they're deliberately being less than fully truthful, but that's another story). No one can be reasonably expected to know things that they don't know. All facts about the real world are conditional upon new evidence proving them wrong (save for purely logical proofs that don't rely at some level on any observations of the real world - but those are therefore not "facts about the real world"). It is natural to strip away unnecessary words, so "to the best of my knowledge" is usually reserved for when it needs to be stressed more than usual, despite the fact that it almost always applies. Not sure what the best solution is to this here. But always saying "to the best of my knowledge" would, to the best of my knowledge, quickly become tiresome and an impediment to communication. To the best of my knowledge, it is usually better to avoid such impediments. From alito at organicrobot.com Fri Nov 25 05:11:19 2005 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:11:19 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124115437.01ca00f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1132895479.22324.133.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 13:50 -0500, gts wrote: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:04:01 -0500, Damien Broderick > wrote: > > > Frankly, I find this fucking ludicrous > > Perhaps you have a better explanation. How do you resolve the problem > Brent's view presents? He believes matter in the brain has "phenomenal > properties" and that this explains sense perception. Why/how is that > matter different from matter outside the brain? Maybe because it is organised differently. A chunk of cut diamond is a sparkly beast, a chunk of graphite isn't. Carbon atoms are not sparkly afaik. Or if you don't like that one try magnetism, and http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/7943/7943notw1.html . (I don't like either as analogies to qualia, but I don't think they are bad in response to your question) From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 25 05:27:55 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:27:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> "Jeff Medina" > please note that no "random mutation" in > evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." Nonsense. An atom of carbon 14 in a molecule DNA decays into nitrogen-14 through beta decay disrupting the DNA molecule and causing a mutation. This effect has no cause and thus can not be predicted, all we can say is that in 5730 years there is a 50% chance it will happen. In addition this event will also produce a high speed electron moving in a random direction probably causing yet another mutation. John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 25 05:48:37 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 23:48:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051124234029.01cde880@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:27 AM 11/25/2005 -0500, John K Clark wrote: >>please note that no "random mutation" in >>evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." > >Nonsense. An atom of carbon 14 in a molecule DNA decays into nitrogen-14 >through beta decay disrupting the DNA molecule and causing a mutation. This >effect has no cause and thus can not be predicted [etc] Okay, granted, but my impression is that under normal circumstances such radiologically-induced mutations are far less frequent than other kinds, which include damage from chemicals such as reactive ions from metabolic processes, frameshifts, deletions and additions, translocations, etc. See, e.g., http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucbhjow/bmsi/bmsi_6.html for some numbers. Rafal? Damien Broderick From alito at organicrobot.com Fri Nov 25 06:27:33 2005 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:27:33 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 16:34 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > If the Turing Test can detect intelligence but not consciousness then we > must have a gene that manufactures qualia but doesn't do anything else, it > can't effect behavior or the test would work. > We might value such a gene a > great deal but to Natural Selection it's useless, in fact to Natural > Selection it's invisible. Even if the gene came about by a lucky chance like > a tornado in a junkyard assembling a 747 it would soon atrophy away after a > few generations as the eyes of cave fish do. > Not necessarily, it could just be a side-effect of the brain's construction. The colour of a neuron doesn't affect behaviour, but it's probably quite well conserved since that's just what neurons look like. > In short if Turing doesn't work then we have a gene that only makes qualia > but Evolution could never provide such a gene therefore I conclude Turing > does work for consciousness. Good think too because every single person on > this list uses it every single day of their lives. > But we don't just rely on the Turing test. We also rely on knowing/believing that the construction of the surrounding entities resembles our own. Imagine that the sole effect of qualing/consciousness on behaviour was to slow down output of all neurons by 10%, then zombie could react in exactly the same way by performing the same slow down, but no qualing would take place. Substitute the word magnetism for qualing if you prefer, the Turing test would not detect magnetism. (Yes you could describe the construction of a machine to detect magnetism, tell the entity to stick it next to his head, and give you a readout, while no such machine is currently available for qualing/consciousness afaik. This does not imply the impossibility of such a machine). From analyticphilosophy at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 06:40:51 2005 From: analyticphilosophy at gmail.com (Jeff Medina) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 01:40:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com> On 11/25/05, John K Clark wrote: > "Jeff Medina" > > > please note that no "random mutation" in > > evolution is acausal or "an effect without a cause." > > Nonsense. [...] Did you stop reading at this bit? Because your example does nothing to contradict the last paragraph of my email, which distinctly specifies the possibility of some low-level physical phenomena being nondeterministic. You also continue to presume, wrongly, that just because our mathematical model for C-14 decay is probabilistic, the underlying physical process must be acausal. A lack of knowledge of a deterministic model of a physical system does not entail a lack of the existence of a deterministic process underlying that system. Asserting acausality in this case simply due to lack of a completely satisfactory deterministic explanatory hypothesis is just as wrong as creationists asserting divine intervention simply due to evolutionary theory's lack of ability to explain a particular evolved trait (as was, but is no longer, the case with flagella, for example). > In addition this event will > also produce a high speed electron moving in a random direction probably > causing yet another mutation. As I said earlier, " The possibility of determinism at the quantum level without requiring hidden variables or any of that is argued by ['t Hooft], for example." Your science hobbyism doesn't qualify you to ignore the opinions of Nobel Laureate theoretical physicists without rather good justification, John. The electron, for which quantum physics is relevant, will move in a direction we can't predict, not a random/uncaused/nondeterministic one, if 't Hooft and others are correct. -- Jeff Medina http://www.painfullyclear.com/ Community Director Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ Relationships & Community Fellow Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies http://www.ieet.org/ School of Philosophy, Birkbeck, University of London http://www.bbk.ac.uk/phil/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 25 07:00:10 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 01:00:10 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.co m> References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051125005942.01d5ca48@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:00 PM 11/24/2005 -0500, Jeff wrote: >The >possibility of determinism at the quantum level without requiring >hidden variables or any of that is argued by t'Hooft, for example. e.g. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0104/0104219.pdf From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 25 07:03:46 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 01:03:46 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051125010232.01cd1f40@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:00 PM 11/24/2005 -0500, Jeff wrote: >t'Hooft, for example. and for more, http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-97332005000300022&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en [1] S.L. Adler, Quantum Mechanics As an Emergent Phenomenon: The Statistical Dynamics of Global Unitary Invariant Matrix Models As the Precursors of Quantum Field Theory (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005). [2] Decoherence and Entropy in Complex Systems, ed. by H.-T. Elze, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 633 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004). From eugen at leitl.org Fri Nov 25 07:40:09 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 08:40:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051125074009.GM2249@leitl.org> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 07:46:00PM -0500, gts wrote: > Yet you acknowlege the experience. That experience *is* qualia, no matter > how we choose to think about it. So qualia just means "the whole of human experience". Can't argue with that. But this is not a theory. It predicts nothing, and can't be falsified. > If the human brain is a machine then it should be possible to build a > machine that experiences qualia. Some would say this is the essence of Of course. > strong AI. This is what Brent envisions also. The question is how do we > build that machine. I think it would be helpful if we understood what the Easy: just replicate what the CNS cells of a particular individual do, and feed them with the right input. Map a vitrified primate at ultrascale detail, build a computational model and load it into a dedicated computational engine, including a fake reality renderer. Switch it on, and everything else emerges. > hell we're talking about when we talk about qualia. :) I think I understand what the hell I'm talking about. I'm not at all understanding what the hell you're talking about. > Whatever it is, it's staring us right in the face. I must have problem set agnosia. I see no problem where you seem to see one. I guess we should just agree to disagree. The conversation goes nowhere. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 07:57:01 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:57:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511242357g48a9da6cu619b40bb91165c87@mail.gmail.com> On 11/24/05, gts wrote: I think it would be helpful if we understood what the > hell we're talking about when we talk about qualia. :) > ### It is probably worthwhile to reflect on the meaning of "understanding". I tend to use this word to denote the ability to predict and control an aspect of the world. I can say I understand a bicycle when I can ride it, take it apart, and put back together. Prediction is the essence of intelligence (see Jeff Hawkins' book "On Intelligence"), and understanding is the job of an intelligence. I am completely satisfied with this form of understanding, as applied to anything that I want to understand. Give me the predictive capacity to let me master the future, and I will be as content as a yogi achieving nirvana. It seems though, that many of us (yogis and some Extropes) desire both more and less: they want to quench an ineffable thirst, to achieve the satisfaction of a wordless desire, to achieve the peace of true enlightenment, without necessarily wanting to do anything about whatever they are enlightened about. I presume that the latter form of understanding is subserved by different neural structures than the ones used in generating the former. It may be that the latter is sited somewhere in the temporal cortex, where states of mystic elation can be triggered by stray currents. Predictive understanding is best expressed in the calm and calculating convolutions of the frontal cortex. I feel reasonably confident that the progress of science will bring us predictive understanding of qualia - being able to manipulate, elicit, change and extinguish them at will. This understanding will be like the understanding we have of circles, which we can draw without fathoming their true Circle-nature. I am equally convinced that no mystic understanding of qualia will flow directly follow from this feat, since I think that the relevant parts of the temporal lobe are quite resistant to frontal influences, at least in some people. I used to say that trying to understand qualia through science is like trying to make a diamond necklace, while using a wet noodle as a drill bit. Now I would say there are two diamonds, one real, one fake. Science is drilling the real one, albeit excruciatingly slowly. The other one is not affected by the noodle at all - but then, why bother about fake diamonds? Rafal From eugen at leitl.org Fri Nov 25 08:03:54 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:03:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <20051124165014.GC2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051125080354.GO2249@leitl.org> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 08:27:37PM -0500, gts wrote: > >But it can't observe itself making that measurement. > > Right, that would require self-awareness. I'm not suggesting molecules are > self-aware, just aware. You've just redefined "aware". Even the measurement part is a stretch: a molecule is a single detector at best. > Robotic insects already exist. I wonder if they are in any fundamental way > different from real insects. Other than the difference in materials, and Statues of people exist. I wonder if they are in any fundamental way different from real people. > the ability to mate and reproduce, aren't they basically the same as real > insects? If not, exactly how are they different? An insect has to survive and reproduce in a hostile environment, sensing multichannel input and making choices. Mechanical insects are to real thing is roughly what 18th century androids are to real people. AI people are having a hard time even reproducing isolated insect skills, and the footprint and power requirements to do so are a fair cry of mm^3 and microwatts of insects. > To me insects look like little flying cameras. You're obviously no biologist. You need way more bits to describe an insect than a camera obscura. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 25 08:07:03 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 03:07:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> <5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> "Jeff Medina" > A lack of knowledge of a deterministic model of a > physical system does not entail a lack of the > existence of a deterministic process > underlying that system. A tiny minority of Physicists have been singing that tired old song for about 80 years now, without one scrap of experimental evidence to support the claim and plenty that seems to refute it. They've desperately looked for loopholes in Bell's inequality and they've found one, sort of. The universe can be deterministic but then it must also be non local; meaning that the reason this Carbon 14 atom right here decayed into a Nitrogen 14 atom is because of what an atom in the Andromeda Galaxy 2 million light years away is doing right now, and that atom is acting the way it is because of an atom in the Hydra Cluster 8 billion light years away, and that atom is acting the way it is because... So in order to predict what this Carbon 14 atom is going to do I'd have to know all there is to know about the universe, and that's about as un- testable as you can get, so I would have no embarrassment calling such a thing random nor would at least 98% of the world's physicists. And 100% of the world's biologists would have no absolutely no objection in using the phrase "random mutation" in a sentence as I did. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 08:43:50 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 03:43:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051125080354.GO2249@leitl.org> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <20051124165014.GC2249@leitl.org> <20051125080354.GO2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 03:03:54 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> To me insects look like little flying cameras. > > You need way more bits to describe an insect than a camera obscura. Of course, but the difference between an insect and a flying camera seems only a matter of those extra bits. The difference seems quantitative, not qualitative. Ignoring the difference in materials, a tiny fly-shaped camera equipped with wings and some programming would be, I think, indistinguishable from a real insect. And presumably real insects experience qualia. Why do they have eyes if not to see? -gts From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 25 09:09:46 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:09:46 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer><5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com> <014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <009901c5f19f$ff892800$61c31b97@administxl09yj> "Jeff Medina" > > A lack of knowledge of a deterministic model of a > > physical system does not entail a lack of the > > existence of a deterministic process > > underlying that system. "John K Clark" > A tiny minority of Physicists have been singing > that tired old song for about 80 years now, [...] There are different definitions of 'determinism'. One sometimes speaks of states that evolve deterministically in time (or space-time) as opposed to other states that evolve stochastically. But one can also speak about determinism in the sense that the predicted outcome of a possible measurement performed on a system - while it is in a given state - are definite, in the sense that the range of the probability function is the set [0 or 1] (or are not definite, in the sense that the range of the probability function is a larger set). It is possible to show (papers by Jarrett, Shimony, Ghirardi, Howard, Eberhard, Cushing, etc.) that a a deterministic theory - one in which the range of any probability distribution of outcomes is the set [0 or 1] - REPRODUCING ALL THE PREDICTIONS OF QM allows, or implies, FTL signals. So, what do we prefer? A deterministic theory which completely violates SR or an indeterministic theory that coexists with SR? From marc.geddes at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 09:48:18 2005 From: marc.geddes at gmail.com (Marc Geddes) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:48:18 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet Message-ID: <7a5e56060511250148m550f4d93qe88dec25bfafa70e@mail.gmail.com> >Prediction is the essence of intelligence (see Jeff Hawkins' book "On Intelligence"), and understanding is the job of an intelligence. I am completely satisfied with this form of understanding, as applied to anything that I want to understand. Give me the predictive capacity to let me master the future, and I will be as content as a yogi achieving nirvana. Rafal, Prediction is indeed a major part of intelligence but not the only part. I think there are more abstract conceptions of causality than just physical causality. I think a more accurate definition of intelligence would be that intelligence is the ability to achieve one's goals efficiently. But even this is not the *true* definition of intelligence I think. I think the *true* definition of intelligence is that intelligence is the ability to integrate different kinds of knowledge into a single explanatory framework. To be more precise, intelligence is ultimately the ability to fully integrate explanations about functional systems with explanations about memes. >I feel reasonably confident that the progress of science will bring us predictive understanding of qualia - being able to manipulate, elicit, change and extinguish them at will. This understanding will be like the understanding we have of circles, which we can draw without fathoming their true Circle-nature. I am equally convinced that no mystic understanding of qualia will flow directly follow from this feat, since I think that the relevant parts of the temporal lobe are quite resistant to frontal influences, at least in some people. Whilst all the evidence would indicate that qualia are entirely *caused by* and *dependent on* physical processes, it is still an open question whether qualia are illusions (i.e they are really material processes) or whether qualia have a reality over and above the physical processes which gave rise to them. The latter position can still be maintained - philosopher David Chalmers is the leading proponent of this view-point. In the battle of wits between me and Sing Inst, my gloves are starting to come off boy. The mists covering my eyes from the nature of intelligence/mind have started to clear a little. The mysteries of mind are actually beginning to crumple under my intellectual onslaught! :) -- To see a World in a grain of sand, And Heaven in a wild flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. -William Blake Please visit my web-site: http://www.riemannai.org/ Sci-Fi, Science and Fantasy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 09:49:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 04:49:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment In-Reply-To: <014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com> <00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer> <5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com> <014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: Jeff writes: "...claiming mutations are totally without cause contributes to public intuition against the plausibility of mutations leading to anything useful..." I cannot understand the importance of your argument, Jeff, unless it's an attempt to open the door to a teleological interpretation of evolution theory. Most physicists accept the conventional Copenhagen interpretation: that quantum events are not only unpredictable, but also undetermined. I don't understand how an unpredictable, undetermined event can be considered causal. Surely every caused event is determined if not also predictable. -gts From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 25 14:37:38 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:37:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer><5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com><014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <000301c5f1cd$c99f09c0$3dc41b97@administxl09yj> "gts" > I don't understand how an unpredictable, > undetermined event can be considered > causal. Surely every caused event is determined > if not also predictable. We define cause as 'a specific preceding event for an effect'. (The term 'preceding' depends on a specific clock and reference frame. Many - David Bohm among them - believe that there must be a 'cosmic' time, a sort of preferred reference frame. But this is another story.) Now one problem is that many performed experiments, using 'entangled pairs' and fast-moving Franson time/energy interferometers, show there is no time-ordering of events. Distinction between causes and effects is impossible, or there is no time at all. A sort of time-like non-separability, similar to the space-like non-separability (also known as non-locality) between 'entangled pairs'. Worse than that. Assuming that two 'entangled' particles run through different arms of an interferometer (i.e. a Mach-Zehnder, or a HOM), with some speed (c or whatever), it is possible to show that the interferential behaviour of these entangled particles (so called two-particle interference) depends on what we may insert in a place wich is AFTER the interference point (a place wich is supposed to be reached, by those entangled particles, AFTER they already met at the interference point). detector1 | | | -------------i-----###--- detector2 | | | | | | ^ | | | | | s ------>----- s = source of entangled particles i = interference point ### = area AFTER interference point In these cases the usual, old, narrow concept of causality seems to be useless. s. From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 25 15:14:51 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:14:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <001b01c5f1d3$0301f2e0$f0084e0c@MyComputer> "Alejandro Dubrovsky" >it [consciousness] could just be a side-effect of the brain's construction. I agree, it's a side-effect, it's is the only explanation of consciousness that is compatible with the fact that Random (effects without a cause) Mutation and Natural Selection produced us. That's why I think the Turing Test can detect consciousness not just intelligence. And even if I'm wrong about that I don't worry about it much because nobody will ever be able to prove me wrong. > But we don't just rely on the Turing test. We also rely on > knowing/believing that the construction of the surrounding > entities resembles our own. Then why don't you believe I'm conscious when I'm in a deep sleep, or even 60 seconds after my heart stopped beating forever? The construction of my brain would still be quite similar to yours. The reason is that if you administered the Turing Test on me at that moment I would receive the same score a rock would get. And in fact in my case you don't even know if I have a biological brain, all you know about me is that in response to a string of ASCII characters I produced a different string of ASCII characters, but nevertheless I have a hunch deep in your gut you think I'm conscious. John K Clark From alito at organicrobot.com Fri Nov 25 15:48:53 2005 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 01:48:53 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <001b01c5f1d3$0301f2e0$f0084e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <001b01c5f1d3$0301f2e0$f0084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <1132933733.22324.191.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 10:14 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "Alejandro Dubrovsky" > > >it [consciousness] could just be a side-effect of the brain's construction. > > I agree, it's a side-effect, it's is the only explanation of consciousness > that is compatible with the fact that Random (effects without a cause) > Mutation and Natural Selection produced us. That's why I think the Turing > Test can detect consciousness not just intelligence. > I don't see how this follows. > And even if I'm wrong about that I don't worry about it much because nobody > will ever be able to prove me wrong. > (You really worry about being proven wrong?) The only reason I worry about qualia (and I do worry sometimes) is due to the upload issue (ie will our uploaded selves be conscious). > > But we don't just rely on the Turing test. We also rely on > > knowing/believing that the construction of the surrounding > > entities resembles our own. > > Then why don't you believe I'm conscious when I'm in a deep sleep, or even > 60 seconds after my heart stopped beating forever? The construction of my > brain would still be quite similar to yours. The reason is that if you > administered the Turing Test on me at that moment I would receive the same > score a rock would get. I wrote we don't just rely on the Turing test, as in we take into consideration other things that are not the Turing test, not that we completely ignore the Turing test. > > And in fact in my case you don't even know if I have a biological brain, all > you know about me is that in response to a string of ASCII characters I > produced a different string of ASCII characters, but nevertheless I have a > hunch deep in your gut you think I'm conscious. Your hunch is almost correct, but I think it's higher than the gut. I think you have a biological brain because I've never met or heard of any device that outputs ASCII like you do that isn't. If, as I consider highly likely, in the future silicon beasts start generating the same style of ASCII output, then I'll probably start hunching differently, as has happened already when instead of interacting in ASCII I interact in chess piece movements. From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 25 15:43:16 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:43:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer><5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com><014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer> <009901c5f19f$ff892800$61c31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <004901c5f1d7$04e0c830$f0084e0c@MyComputer> "scerir" > It is possible to show (papers by Jarrett, Shimony, > Ghirardi, Howard, Eberhard, Cushing, etc.) that a > a deterministic theory - one in which the range of any > probability distribution of outcomes is the set [0 or 1] > REPRODUCING ALL THE PREDICTIONS OF QM I don't see the advantage of bringing back determinism to Physics if the price you must pay is something as un-testable as non locality. People say Einstein didn't like non-determinism but what he REALLY didn't like is non-locality, the idea that you can't understand anything until you understand everything. > QM allows, or implies, FTL signals. Bullshit. We know for a fact that you can change things at a distance much faster than light, it has been demonstrated in the lab, but they are NOT signals, you can not use the phenomena to transmit information. John K Clark From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 17:30:34 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:30:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051125173035.57940.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> --- gts wrote: > Dualism implies something ghostly and non-physical. This might be splitting hairs, but physics is riddled with "ghostly" phenomena. Gravity is a good example as are other energy fields. Virtual particles are another. These phenomena may be "insubstantial" but not non-physical since they can be described by physics. A sophisticated dualist/mystic such as myself might believe that people have souls but not neccessarily say that souls are non-physical. Just that we do not understand the physics of souls yet. If bosons can be quantumly entangled and the soul is composed of them, then it is quite possible for a system of entangled bosons to maintain itself independently of a material substrate. This might explain why alleged ghosts seem to be capturable on film. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 25 17:42:46 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:42:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051125173035.57940.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051125173035.57940.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43874D16.8050102@pobox.com> The Avantguardian wrote: > > If > bosons can be quantumly entangled and the soul is > composed of them, Stu, if you don't understand something, just call it "magic", don't barbarize decent physics. If this were the SL4 list, I would let you go on posting, but I would require that you not use the word "boson" for another year. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 25 17:48:42 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:48:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Note on "Random (effects without a cause)" comment References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer><5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com><014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer><009901c5f19f$ff892800$61c31b97@administxl09yj> <004901c5f1d7$04e0c830$f0084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <000301c5f1e8$7b42cfd0$57c51b97@administxl09yj> From: "John K Clark" > I don't see the advantage of bringing back determinism > to Physics if the price you must pay is something > as un-testable as non locality. I agree. > People say Einstein didn't like non-determinism > but what he REALLY didn't like is non-locality, > the idea that you can't understand anything until > you understand everything. I agree again. Einstein had (1927) his own hidden variable model, very detailed too. But he refused to publish it because he soon realized it was deterministic but, of course, non-local. > > QM allows, or implies, FTL signals. > Bullshit. We know for a fact that you can change > things at a distance much faster than light, > it has been demonstrated in the lab, but they > are NOT signals, you can not use the phenomena > to transmit information. The so called non-locality of QM (and of Nature) is not true non-locality because it does not allow FTL (human) signals. It is non-separability. We agree on this. What I have said is that - as shown by Bell in a paper, and he also made several numerical simulations at CERN, then by Eberhard, and many others - a deterministic theory reproducing the results of (the indeterministic) QM would imply the possibility of sending FTL (human) signals. Signals, not mere 'influences'. [*] s. [*] It is possible to prove that. The following maybe helps, but it is not a formal proof. Bell's condition (violated by QM) is: p[A,B,lambda](x,y|i,j) = p[A,lambda](x|i) p[B,lambda](y|j) the joint probability of outcomes x and y, for measurements of observables i and j, in the A and B wings, is equal to the product of the the separate probabilities. 'Lambda' are hidden variables. The condition above is equivalent (after Jarrett) to the conjunction of the following two double independent conditions: Separability condition p[A,lambda] (x|i,j,y) = p[A,lambda] (x|i,j) p[B,lambda] (y|i,j,x) = P[B,lambda] (y|i,j) Locality condition p[A,lambda] (x|i,j) = p[A,lambda] (x|i) p[B,lambda] (y|i,j) = p[B,lambda] (y|j) The separability condition is violated by QM and by experiments. A deterministic theory reproducing all the results of QM does violate Bell's condition. So it does violate the separability condition or the locality condition. But a deterministic theory reproducing all the results of QM cannot violate the separability condition. Because if (see the right hand of sep. cond.) the specification of lambda, i, j, determines completely the outcomes x, y, then any additional conditioning on x or y (see the left hand of sep. cond.) is superfluous, having x and y just one value allowed (so they cannot affect the probability) which (in such a deterministic theory) can take just values 0 or 1. Hence a deterministic theory reproducing all the results of QM does violate the locality condition. Such a violation implies FTL signals. From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 18:32:36 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:32:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <43874D16.8050102@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20051125183236.93678.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote: > Stu, if you don't understand something, just call it > "magic", don't > barbarize decent physics. If this were the SL4 > list, I would let you go > on posting, but I would require that you not use the > word "boson" for > another year. Eli, while I am not an expert in QED, what is wrong with my usage of bosons? Bosons are integer spin particles that have unusual properties of being able to colocalize with each other (photons are an example as are gluons). They interact only very selectively with particles of matter such as leptons and baryons (e.g when they are at the proper energy/wavelength/color). And they are the so called force- carrying virtual particles that hold matter together by shuttling back and forth between quarks. In other words, they seem to have insubstantial "ghostly" properties. If it will make you happy, I could refer to them in my ghost hypothesis as non-fermions for one year? BTW... I prefer using the term "undiscovered science" to "magic" in technocratic circles. After all "when in Rome do as the Romans do". Unless of course you suggest that I barbarize Rome too. ;) The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 19:57:19 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:57:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> --- gts wrote: > Correct me if you like, Brent, but your theory seems to be physicalist, at least in so much as it seems to reject mind-body dualism. And as Nagel states here, "If physicalism is to be defended, phenomenological features must themselves be given a physical account." This what we've been asking you to do. > > Them philosophers are totally bat-guano. > > :) But empirical science seems just as lost here. Herein lies my problem with "qualia",...and with religion. When the universe presents you with something about which you have many unanswered questions, the correct answer to any of those questions should be "I don't know." (Or perhaps, "I don't know,...yet.") Not "qualia" or "God". Humans, especially clever humans, have an aversion to "I don't know.", perhaps because their sense of self-worth, is linked to having the right answer and being admired/respected/compensated for delivering it as needed. "I don't know" refers to he/she who utters (or should utter) it, and only obliquely to the matter addressed by 'the question'. That question remains,...unanswered, but whatever answer there may be also remains, unprejudiced by the refreshing clarity and directness of "I don't know". "Qualia" or "God" may yet prove to be the answer, but only when vetted by the usual process, not proferred as a fudge factor. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 25 20:40:18 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:40:18 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] FTL and Time Machines References: <5844e22f0511241900t175317fbj83f6356750d7abe7@mail.gmail.com><00d201c5f181$04e57930$9a054e0c@MyComputer><5844e22f0511242240w629a16ax8e88c53af6b74900@mail.gmail.com><014901c5f197$54fefd40$9a054e0c@MyComputer><009901c5f19f$ff892800$61c31b97@administxl09yj><004901c5f1d7$04e0c830$f0084e0c@MyComputer> <000301c5f1e8$7b42cfd0$57c51b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <041201c5f200$88a31c80$100d4e0c@MyComputer> In looking over the Extropian archives I noticed that the subject of faster than light signaling and time machines had come up on the list before, about 8 years ago. I didn't have time to enter into the discussion then but I do now, so I just used my Tachyon modem to send a message to the list back in time to December 17 1997, and just for the hell of it I decided to cc a copy to the list for November 25 2005 too. =========================================== Relativity does not forbid anything from moving faster than light, only stuff that has mass or energy or carries information. Strangely some things have none of these attributes, although calling them "things" may be stretching a point. It's been proven experimentally that some quantum effects propagate much faster than light, probably instantly, and for unlimited distances. One system can influence another system on the other side of the universe with little or no delay, but it carries no information because the receiving system just changes from one apparently random mode to another, it's only when you compare the two systems (and that can only be done at light speed or less) does the correspondence between the two systems become obvious. The 2 random modes have equal energy so energy is not transferred either. A less spooky example could be found in the idea of Phase Speed. I'm standing in the center of a huge hollow sphere 2 light years in diameter, I've been there for a long time and I'm holding a powerful LASER that makes a spot of light on the distant wall of the sphere one light year away. Suddenly, still holding the LASER and in the space of one second I make a complete 360 degree turn. Exactly one year later an observer standing at the same place would see the spot move much faster than light, it would travel the entire circumference of the sphere, 2PI or 6.28 light years in only one second. No photon moved faster than light however, and no energy or information between any two points traveled faster than light. A photon of light moves at light speed and carries energy and information, a spot of light can move at any speed but carries neither energy nor information. And then there are Tachyons. Actually relativity does not forbid matter moving faster than light, it forbids matter moving AT the speed of light. That's almost the same thing but not quite. Perhaps a particle could somehow tunnel past the speed of light or maybe Tachyons have always moved faster than light from the first instant of The Big Bang. People have looked for Tachyons but have never found the slightest evidence that they exist in nature, much to the relief of physicists. Tachyons are an embarrassment, the faster they move less energy they have, one that moved just a little faster than light would have a lot of energy, one that moved at an infinite velocity would have zero energy. Much worse, Tachyons move backward in time, they arrive at their destination before they start. You could communicate with the past. Even though they have never been detected and the laws of physics do not demand that Tachyons exist, they don't seem to forbid them either. Most think nature is totalitarian, if it's not forbidden then it's mandatory. What about the logical paradoxes that would result from communicating with the past, wouldn't that be enough to rule out Tachyons? It would if anybody saw them, but suppose nature rubbed out any witnesses to her crime and brought a universe to an end that was about to see a paradox. Damn, I just knocked my coffee cup off the table, what a mess! I'm really not in the mood to clean it up, instead I'll use my Gateway 14,400 Tachyon modem and send myself some E mail 2 minutes ago. I'll just hit the send key and .....brought a universe to an end that was about to see a paradox. Pardon me, I just got some E mail from John, let's see what it says " Dear John: Be careful with that coffee cup near your elbow, you're about to knock it over." Wow, John is right, that cup is dangerously near the edge! I'll put it in a safe place. It was nice of John to warn me about it, it's too bad that means oblivion for him and his entire universe, but that's life, nature just will not allow anybody to observe a paradox. I know what you're thinking, how could John be so stupid, he must be completely out of his mind! Why else would he deliberately buy an obsolete 14,400 Tachyon modem? Well, call me cheap if you want but I still think the 28,800 model is too expensive, besides I have it on very good authority that Gateway will drop the price next year. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 25 21:20:28 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:20:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051125212028.32169.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Anna Tylor wrote: > Ok, again sorry to be bothering you > I have a few questions when you have some available time > I really don't want to be bothersome but what can I do, I really > want feed > back You need to look up the answers on your own. (That I needed a week to even tell you this much, should tell you how little time I have to spare.) You're on your own for now. BTW: > Quoting Andrian Tymes: It is considered quite rude in some circles to mispell peoples' names like this, when you have the proper spelling in front of you (like, say, in the email you were quoting). Moreover, typos like this tell people that you're putting very little effort into answering your own questions - you don't even take the time to check your posts for typos (yes, this can take many many minutes, or even an hour just to compose one single email if it's a long one - that's just the way it is), to make it easier for people to read and understand your questions. (The harder it is for people to read your questions, the less likely people will bother to do so.) Again - I've given you pointers, but you are on your own at this point. The documents you have been given the URLs of contain many of the answers you seek, and many of the answers you will need to know in order to find out how to ask for the rest of what you seek. From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 25 21:32:26 2005 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:32:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <20051123202449.GL2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051125213226.1305.qmail@web60011.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:47:14PM -0500, gts wrote: > > > Neuroscience falls under the general rubric of > *physicalism* referenced > > several times in the article. > > Oh, it is so easy to deny reality > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trey-ellis/the-right-hasnt-cornered_b_7876.html > anything that doesn't kill you immediately doesn't > obviously exist. > Nyah, nyah, I don't see you. Ksht. > > > It seems physicalism can tell us nothing about the > subject. It cannot tell > > Right. Empirical science is totally useless, agreed. > All that pesky knowledge, and the > artifact trappings. Burn them all, I say. Smash > them, and go back to nature. > Naked, with a pointy stick, in the Serengeti. Go Eugene! Sometimes I just love this list. > > > us what is like to be a bat, or what it is like > for Brent to see the color > > red. > > It is relatively easy to make you feel how to like > to be a bat, by gradually turning > you into a bat (such a technology will eventually > exist). Unfortunately, by turning > you back into a human you will no longer remember, > unless you'd settle for some fake > memories (or decide to remain a bat a priori). But > then, taking mind-altering drugs > is much easier, so why bother? Yeah, baby! We're out of the box now. :-} And I'm thinking, it you could switch back and forth rapidly from human to bat to human to bat maybe then you'd get some hint, as a human, as to the nature of 'batness'. As unimaginative, unbold, and unoriginal as it may be, I would like to start with switching to female. Check out the 'feel' of that. The regular feel, not the PMS feel,...at first anyway. > > > "If physicalism is to be defended, the > phenomenological features must > > themselves be given a physical account. But when > we examine their > > subjective character it seems that such a result > is impossible. The reason > > What does this suppose to mean? If my denial of > reality is to be defended, > I can be burned at a stake with a cherubic, > subjective smile on my lips? > > > is that every subjective phenomenon is essentially > connected with a single > > point of view, and it seems inevitable that an > objective, physical theory > > [i.e., any argument from neuroscience] will > abandon that point of view." > > I think my other shoe is a hippo. It seems, my other > foot has abandoned > that point of view, and is now objectively missing. The box disappears from view over the virtual yet physical horizon. > > Correct me if you like, Brent, but your theory > seems to be physicalist, at > > least in so much as it seems to reject mind-body > dualism. And as Nagel > > I emphatically refoot the shoe-sandal dualism as > physicalist in its toe-nailture. > Pedo-oral inserts "We'll meet again Don't know where, don't know when But I'm sure we'll meet again some sunny day."* *Dr. Strangelove reference > > states here, "If physicalism is to be defended, > phenomenological features > > must themselves be given a physical account." This > what we've been asking > > you to do. > > > > >Them philosophers are totally bat-guano. > > > > :) But empirical science seems just as lost here. > > No, empirical science has no trouble tickling your > brain to evoke all > kind of interesting experiences. > > Can telling fancy stories do such stupid tricks? > > Thought not. So, concluding for the moment our exi-box peregrinations, we return, refreshed perhaps, to our comfortable and familiar home turf. There, we repose thoughtful, leaning against the once-confining box which now takes the aspect of a child's playpen. Once protective and otherwise useful to us in our infancy, it is now transformed to a monument, an armrest, and a vantage point, from whence we gaze upon our new "box", the unplumbed universe with its seen limits and its unseen mysteries. Bigger than a breadbox. Best, Jeff Davis Aspiring Transhuman / Delusional Ape (Take your pick) Nicq MacDonald __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 02:34:58 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 21:34:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051125173035.57940.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051125173035.57940.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 12:30:34 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > --- gts wrote: > >> Dualism implies something ghostly and non-physical. > > This might be splitting hairs, but physics is riddled > with "ghostly" phenomena... If > bosons can be quantumly entangled and the soul is > composed of them, then it is quite possible for a > system of entangled bosons to maintain itself > independently of a material substrate. Yes, in fact phase entanglement is one argument from science for the pan-psychism that I've suggested here. If your idea is true then your self-label of "sophisticated dualist/mystic" is a departure from the traditional meaning of dualism and may better be described as sort of physical monism. The greater debate about consciousness can be seen as one between emergentism and pan-psychism. The pan-psychist rejects the idea that mind is a separate, novel property that emerges by some seeming miracle out of inert matter. He believes instead that if mind exists, it must be present at some level in all matter. Brent rejects emergentism, which is why I suggested pan-psychism. -gts From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 26 05:28:59 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 21:28:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511232045x17168260s@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511260529.jAQ5Tbe15465@tick.javien.com> Greetings sudokuers, I was the one who proposed the 50 sudoku competition, but I may need to disqualify myself. It is for a *reallllly* wicked cool reason: I have written a program that solves sudokus. Clearly I have too much time on my hands. {8^D This program cannot always solve the puzzles: the easy ones it solves, but if it is moderate difficulty, one must help it along. But it solved one with difficulty rating of diabolical, with my help only thrice. This puzzle I couldn't solve by hand: I kept making mistakes end ending up blocked. But the program and my brain together solved it in 6 minutes. I may be able to code up the meta-rules to make it more capable, but I am not a good programmer. Perhaps you could do it. I am willing to share this code with your agreement to not make fun of my programming skills. Altho the code is primitive, it has some really cool math in it. It is a microsloth excel sheet with macros in it. It isn't that hard a task: I started and finished it today, and I solved my first sudoku Monday, solving a total of about 8 by hand. Hey, that may be an even more interesting geek contest: see who can write the fastest sudoku solving code. Or see who can come up with a sudoku that can be solved by one's own program but the other guy's program cannot solve. Or have a hybrid competition: each person and her program is a team working together, silicon and carbon, against the other guy's and his program, in a time trial with the same puzzle. Post me offlist if you want a copy: spike66 at comcast.net spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 8:46 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile > > You will spoil the experiment if you go sharing what you've learnt on the > list! > > > > Whoops, sorry for the violence. > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * > NaNoWriMo word count: 34048 (http://nanowrimo.org) > > > On 24/11/05, Acy Stapp wrote: > > Alright. I'm using the puzzles from http://www.sudoku.com.au/ since > > they have a good-sized free archive. I'm just starting with today's > > and working backward. Anyone else? Todays puzzle I solved in 23 > > minutes and discovered a few tricks. I also found that there are > > multiple answers to some puzzles, at least today's front page easy > > one. > > > > Acy > > > > On 11/23/05, spike wrote: > > > > > > OK do 50. Keep track of the solve times. spike > > > On 11/22/05, spike wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > So we each do exactly 50 sudokus, then time ourselves on an identical > > > sudoku > > > to see who learned the most tricks doing the first 50. Then we are > > > actually > > > measuring something that is more towards IQ than how good we already > are at > > > puzzles; we measure how fast we learn a new puzzle. It's a puzzle- > learning > > > contest as opposed to just a puzzle contest. I expect the younger > among us > > > will get faster quicker. But will they end up faster than the > veteran > > > puzzle prole? > > > > > > Who is in? > > > > > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 05:30:08 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 00:30:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 14:57:19 -0500, Jeff Davis wrote: > Herein lies my problem with "qualia",...and with > religion. When the universe presents you with > something about which you have many unanswered > questions, the correct answer to any of those > questions should be "I don't know." (Or perhaps, "I > don't know,...yet.") Not "qualia" or "God". I don't see the "qualia" and "God" concepts as in the same category here. Few people claim to have seen God but almost everyone will acknowledge seeing qualia. Qualia are the object of our inquiry here, not an answer to it. Religion/God/Mysticism/Cartesian-Dualism is one answer to the question of qualia, but one that most extropians and transhumanists would probably prefer to reject. The need for divine intervention would make the extropian dream of strong AI enormously more difficult and intimidating. How would we persuade or force God to inject souls into our machines? > Humans, especially clever humans, have an aversion to "I don't > know." Especially true for philosophers and scientists. Good thing, that! -gts From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 26 07:00:09 2005 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 08:00:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] This free agent is back online Message-ID: <470a3c520511252300n1414670eld7755d35389cec67@mail.gmail.com> I am back online after a few difficult weeks. To make a long story short, as of today I am no longer anybody's employeee, and am starting my new life as a free agent. What comes next will depend on my ability to turn knowledge and ideas into cash. The change from underworked and overpaid bureaucrat to entrepreneur is quite radical. But I find optimism in my transhumanist worldview: radical change is not to be feared, but rather embraced and ridden with fun like a big wave. Of course, while change is more good than bad, one has to watch ahead, plan carefully, and constantly evaluate opportunities and threats. And this is precisely what I am going to dedicate myself to: I will be a "full-time transhumanist consultant", operating via FutureTAG and the IEET, and trying to offer clients pratcical advice on how to ride the big waves ahead. G. From jay.dugger at gmail.com Sat Nov 26 08:13:25 2005 From: jay.dugger at gmail.com (Jay Dugger) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 08:13:25 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: This free agent is back online In-Reply-To: <470a3c520511252300n1414670eld7755d35389cec67@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520511252300n1414670eld7755d35389cec67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5366105b0511260013m165b62b8tb941b3d23b274294@mail.gmail.com> Saturday, 26 November 2005 G.P.: Welcome back, and good luck! -- Jay Dugger Please donate to a charity you like. From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 08:32:07 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 00:32:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] This free agent is back online In-Reply-To: <470a3c520511252300n1414670eld7755d35389cec67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051126083207.68303.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > But I find optimism in my > transhumanist worldview: > radical change is not to be feared, but rather > embraced and ridden > with fun like a big wave. May the tide be with you, Guilio. :) The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 12:15:59 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 07:15:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 16:34 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > We might value such a [qualia] gene a great deal but to Natural > Selection it's useless, in fact to Natural > Selection it's invisible. Why useless and invisible? Presumably animals run from forest fires because they smell, hear, see, or feel them. All qualia. -gts From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 26 14:01:22 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:01:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer><1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > Why useless and invisible? Presumably animals run from forest fires > because they smell, hear, see, or feel them. All qualia. Oh I agree! I think qualia does effect behavior, or rather, such complex behavior is imposable without qualia, but then I also think the Turing Test (a behavior test) works. If the Turing Test can see it then so can Natural Selection, if the Turing Test can't see it then neither can Natural Selection and thus could never have produced it. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 14:38:04 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:38:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:01:22 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "gts" > >> Why useless and invisible? Presumably animals run from forest fires >> because they smell, hear, see, or feel them. All qualia. > > Oh I agree! I think qualia does effect behavior, or rather, such complex > behavior is imposable without qualia... I tend to agree, but for the sake of argument, and possibly relevant to your thoughts about the Turing test, an alternative view is that of epiphenomenalism. According to this view, qualia are irrelevant to behavior. The conventional view of the role of qualia looks like this: environmental stimulus -> qualia -> response epiphenomenalism looks like this: ........................................qualia................. .......................................... ^ ...................... ......................................... | ....................... environmental stimulus -> response Here qualia "happen" but do not drive behavior. If the only function of evolution is perpetuation of genes, there is some justification for wondering why it did not produce mindless zombies. Human-like zombies might have done the job quite well. After all a very large fraction of our behaviors are unconscious behaviors with no apparent awareness of any qualia. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 26 17:57:27 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 12:57:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60511242357g48a9da6cu619b40bb91165c87@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60511242357g48a9da6cu619b40bb91165c87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:57:01 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On 11/24/05, gts wrote: > I tend to use this word [understanding] to denote the ability to predict > and control > an aspect of the world. I can say I understand a bicycle when I can > ride it, take it apart, and put back together. Prediction is the > essence of intelligence (see Jeff Hawkins' book "On Intelligence"), > and understanding is the job of an intelligence. I am completely > satisfied with this form of understanding, as applied to anything that > I want to understand. Give me the predictive capacity to let me master > the future, and I will be as content as a yogi achieving nirvana. Prediction and control may be the objective job of "intelligence", but I wonder it this definition fully encompasses the meaning of "understanding". I was thinking about a related subject recently, concerning Newton's elucidation of the laws of gravity. Newton certainly did a great deal to help us predict how gravity works, but he was criticized (by Leibniz, as I recall) for not helping us *understand* gravity. To say, "Things fall to earth because of the force of gravity" is really to ay nothing at all about the real nature of gravity. It's a bit like saying "Plants grow because of the force of water". His mathematical formalism did a great job of *prediction* but did little or nothing in the area of true understanding. David Deutch makes a similar point in _The Fabric of Reality_ concerning the mathematical formalism of QM. The theory enables us to do a fantastic job of prediction and control (what you or Hawkins seem here to define as the sum of intelligence), but as we all know the proper understanding of QM is another thing entirely. -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 26 22:04:55 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:04:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Benford and Rose on "the future" Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051126160432.01d23c48@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.benford-rose.com/tnf-intro.php From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 26 22:17:17 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:17:17 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] LOST CHAPTER FROM M. ROSE'S *THE LONG TOMORROW* Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051126161529.01d41228@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.benford-rose.com/wormisatwork.php "This chapter was left out of MRR's recent book, The Long Tomorrow; How Advances in Evolutionary Biology Can Help Us Postpone Aging, Oxford University Press, 2005. Here it is for you to judge if this was the right decision. "A Worm is at Work" An Insider's View of The Genetics of Aging, circa 2004." From HerbM at learnquick.com Sat Nov 26 22:22:48 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 14:22:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Benford and Rose on "the future" In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051126160432.01d23c48@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: > Damien Broderick > Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2005 2:05 PM > To: 'ExI chat list' > Subject: [extropy-chat] Benford and Rose on "the future" > > http://www.benford-rose.com/tnf-intro.php Thanks for the link -- as one who is only now (just finishing) reading your book "The Spike" allow me to say thank you and that it is likely that I (and many others) are interested in any such things you notice or discover. Perhaps the simplest way of expressing my appreciation of your book is to say: I am reading it just AFTER reading "The Singularity is Near" (which I also enjoyed) and yet your book has no trouble holding my interest, peaking my curiousity, or stimulating my imagination while it informs. Thanks. Curiously we are near neighbors -- SAtx.rr and austin.rr. It was only last month that I taught two courses at HEB down there. -- Herb Martin From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 26 22:36:30 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:36:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer><1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net><003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <002601c5f2d9$e05a81a0$de084e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > an alternative view is that of epiphenomenalism. According > to this view, qualia are irrelevant to behavior. I think epiphenomenalism is just playing with words, it's one of those ideas that's so bad it's not even wrong. It would be like saying the toy balloon did not burst because the pressure inside it was too great, it burst because there were too many molecules inside it colliding with the fabric of the balloon. Yes it's true that when I saw Big Foot the neural network in my head sent a signal to the muscles in my legs causing me to move in a trajectory that diverged 180 degrees from Big Foot's advance; but it is equally true to say that when I saw Big Foot I got afraid and ran away. > epiphenomenalism looks like this: > ........................................qualia.............. > .......................................... ^ .................. > ......................................... | ................... > environmental stimulus -> response >Here qualia "happen" but do not drive behavior. But if it ALWAYS happened that way then I could state that the response was caused by the qualia and have absolutely positively 100% no fear of ever being proven wrong. > If the only function of evolution is perpetuation of genes, there is some > justification for wondering why it did not produce mindless zombies. Some justification? I know with complete certainty that Evolution did manage to produce at least one entity that was conscious, so I'd say that is one hell of a lot more than "some justification", it completely closes the book on the possibility of intelligent but unconscious zombies. Because of this I am as certain as anything I know that if you detect intelligence you're detecting consciousness too. If you somehow manage to convinced me that I'm wrong about that then my entire world view is dead wrong and the only logical thing for me to do is burn all my Science books and become a scientologist, or a moslem fundamentalist, or a born again christian, or something equally wacky. John K Clark From femmechakra at hotmail.com Sat Nov 26 22:45:53 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:45:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051125212028.32169.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Mr. Tymes Again thank you for your time, as you've repeated, you don't have very much of it. Ok so here's the truth: I am not and never will be a writer or a scientist, I am very well aware of this fact. My problem is a little bizarre and I need to talk to someone about it or i'm going to lose my mind. I'm not a kook, I already know you think this but really i'm a very talented and busy artist. I do consider myself educated, creative and intelligent but I have no where near the depth of knowledge that the people on Extropy chat have. So here's the problem: Since August 05, I have not been able to stop researching specific fields. (In passing, the last time I researched anything that wasn't in my field was over 8 years ago). The Pyramids, the stars, AI and Time Travel. Nothing else. It almost seems like an addiction, every spare moment I have I jump on the net to research. This might seem quite naturel to you, but for me it's extremely bizarre. I have over 50 pages of notes and have spent hours and hours trying to figure out what all of it means. I'm a little overwhelmed. In August, the first thing I researched was AI, the singularity institute and Edward Yudkowsky. That's why I contacted him, I thought maybe he could help me out to figure this stuff out. I really don't mean to be a nuissance and if you could even direct me to someone or a specific site that I can talk to openly about all this stuff I would be extremely grateful. My question: In June I did something I have never done before, a drug. It was a very overwhelming fantastic experience for I thought of things never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined. Could this drug have caused this effect? Am I experiencing this addiction based upon the memory from that day? I know this all sounds bizarre and if you don't mind I already know you think i'm a kook and would prefer nobody else has the same opinion. I don't make it a habit of contacting people that I don't know, but I certainly can't talk to my friends, family or other artists about this. So again, if you could take a moment of your time and help me out one last time I would be very grateful. Thanking you again Anna >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:20:28 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > Ok, again sorry to be bothering you > > I have a few questions when you have some available time > > I really don't want to be bothersome but what can I do, I really > > want feed > > back > >You need to look up the answers on your own. (That I needed a week to >even tell you this much, should tell you how little time I have to >spare.) You're on your own for now. > >BTW: > > > Quoting Andrian Tymes: > >It is considered quite rude in some circles to mispell peoples' names >like this, when you have the proper spelling in front of you (like, >say, in the email you were quoting). Moreover, typos like this tell >people that you're putting very little effort into answering your own >questions - you don't even take the time to check your posts for typos >(yes, this can take many many minutes, or even an hour just to compose >one single email if it's a long one - that's just the way it is), to >make it easier for people to read and understand your questions. (The >harder it is for people to read your questions, the less likely people >will bother to do so.) > >Again - I've given you pointers, but you are on your own at this point. >The documents you have been given the URLs of contain many of the >answers you seek, and many of the answers you will need to know in >order to find out how to ask for the rest of what you seek. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From femmechakra at hotmail.com Sat Nov 26 23:22:50 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:22:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Mr. Tymes I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving you permission to make my e-mails public. So therefore if you would be so kind to refrain from e-mailing anybody else what I write I would ever be grateful. Thanking you for the last time Anna >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the first > > time I > > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > >No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet the > > way I > > >communicate > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. > >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other people >to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to >others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple terms >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > > > Anyhow > > >thank you for > > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes could > > you at > > >least look > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of it > > makes > > >sense, it would be much appreciated. > >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added more >comments. I shall respond to those. > > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > >computational leverage > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > > extent that > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience > >Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. > >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among those >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance the >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new >mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they are >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly and >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical terms, >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their body. > > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the universe > > (such > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > > physics > > >consistency arguments. > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and graphing, > > a human > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up with > > simple, > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > > >>huge knowledge and expertise. > >Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the path >to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more clearly. >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only works >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are trying >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. > >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. Yes, >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training and >experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it is >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of any >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen to >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained >individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, >as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too inaccurate >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at least >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want to >spend their limited time.) > >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of the >trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very well >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's specialty. >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 year >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said >child), for example. > > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > > sparse, high > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > > observer > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of inertial > > frame > > >properties). > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > > framework). > >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. > >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn to >when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it often >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since many >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even though >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily >used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such as >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can be >found online. > >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic >description of the concept. > >And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do >have all the time in the world to give you information, or effectively >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on these >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ > >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this >alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and you >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's like >to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a lot, >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what it's >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). > >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar lines. >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got >other things I need to do tonight. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 00:08:44 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:08:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <002601c5f2d9$e05a81a0$de084e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer> <002601c5f2d9$e05a81a0$de084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:36:30 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "gts" > >> an alternative view is that of epiphenomenalism. According >> to this view, qualia are irrelevant to behavior. > > I think epiphenomenalism is just playing with words, it's one of those > ideas that's so bad... Most philosophers in the field try to avoid epiphenomenalism because it seems so counter-intuitive, but actually there are reasons and evidence to support it. For example experiments have shown that people pull their hands away from intense heat, such as that from a hot stove, a fraction of a second before they become aware of the heat qualia. The test subject will claim, after the fact, that he pulled his hand away "because the stove was hot" (because his behavior was driven by his qualia) but his actions tell a different story. In fact his behavior was a direct response to the stimulus and the quale was merely an epiphenomenon. It is at least conceivable that all supposedly qualia-driven behaviors work the same way. >> If the only function of evolution is perpetuation of genes, there is >> some justification for wondering why it did not produce mindless >> zombies. > > Some justification? I know with complete certainty that Evolution did > manage to produce at least one entity that was conscious, so I'd say > that is one hell of a lot more than "some justification", it completely > closes the book on the possibility of intelligent but unconscious > zombies. Seems to me that the fact that evolution produced aware organisms capable of experiencing qualia does not "completely close the book" on the possibility that it might have done otherwise. Evolution might have produced a lot of things. > Because of this I am as certain as anything I know that if you detect > intelligence > you're detecting consciousness too. I really like your idea here; it supports my other arguments in favor of pan-psychism. However I am reluctant to say I am "as certain as anything" about this subject of consciousness and qualia. If I am certain of anything, it is that these questions are among the most difficult of all questions in science and philosophy. -gts From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sat Nov 26 23:44:53 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:44:53 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] In Memory of Peter Drucker Message-ID: <4388F375.1020601@mindspring.com> [In memory of Peter Drucker who died November 11th, almost 96. -Terry] Also, see: < http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5165460 > [Trusting the teacher in the grey-flannel suit] < http://www.economist.com/surveys/displayStory.cfm?story_id=770819 > Surveys SURVEY: THE NEAR FUTURE The next society Nov 1st 2001 From The Economist print edition Tomorrow is closer than you think. Peter Drucker* explains how it will differ from today, and what needs to be done to prepare for it THE new economy may or may not materialise, but there is no doubt that the next society will be with us shortly. In the developed world, and probably in the emerging countries as well, this new society will be a good deal more important than the new economy (if any). It will be quite different from the society of the late 20th century, and also different from what most people expect. Much of it will be unprecedented. And most of it is already here, or is rapidly emerging. In the developed countries, the dominant factor in the next society will be something to which most people are only just beginning to pay attention: the rapid growth in the older population and the rapid shrinking of the younger generation. Politicians everywhere still promise to save the existing pensions system, but they--and their constituents--know perfectly well that in another 25 years people will have to keep working until their mid-70s, health permitting. What has not yet sunk in is that a growing number of older people--say those over 50--will not keep on working as traditional full-time nine-to-five employees, but will participate in the labour force in many new and different ways: as temporaries, as part-timers, as consultants, on special assignments and so on. What used to be personnel and are now known as human-resources departments still assume that those who work for an organisation are full-time employees. Employment laws and regulations are based on the same assumption. Within 20 or 25 years, however, perhaps as many as half the people who work for an organisation will not be employed by it, certainly not on a full-time basis. This will be especially true for older people. New ways of working with people at arm's length will increasingly become the central managerial issue of employing organisations, and not just of businesses. Click to enlarge The shrinking of the younger population will cause an even greater upheaval, if only because nothing like this has happened since the dying centuries of the Roman empire. In every single developed country, but also in China and Brazil, the birth rate is now well below the replacement rate of 2.2 live births per woman of reproductive age. Politically, this means that immigration will become an important--and highly divisive--issue in all rich countries. It will cut across all traditional political alignments. Economically, the decline in the young population will change markets in fundamental ways. Growth in family formation has been the driving force of all domestic markets in the developed world, but the rate of family formation is certain to fall steadily unless bolstered by large-scale immigration of younger people. The homogeneous mass market that emerged in all rich countries after the second world war has been youth-determined from the start. It will now become middle-age-determined, or perhaps more likely it will split into two: a middle-age-determined mass market and a much smaller youth-determined one. And because the supply of young people will shrink, creating new employment patterns to attract and hold the growing number of older people (especially older educated people) will become increasingly important. Knowledge is all The next society will be a knowledge society. Knowledge will be its key resource, and knowledge workers will be the dominant group in its workforce. Its three main characteristics will be: .Borderlessness, because knowledge travels even more effortlessly than money. .Upward mobility, available to everyone through easily acquired formal education. .The potential for failure as well as success. Anyone can acquire the "means of production", ie, the knowledge required for the job, but not everyone can win. Together, those three characteristics will make the knowledge society a highly competitive one, for organisations and individuals alike. Information technology, although only one of many new features of the next society, is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society--not only businesses, but also schools, universities, hospitals and increasingly government agencies too--has to be globally competitive, even though most organisations will continue to be local in their activities and in their markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at what price. Knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades This new knowledge economy will rely heavily on knowledge workers. At present, this term is widely used to describe people with considerable theoretical knowledge and learning: doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, chemical engineers. But the most striking growth will be in "knowledge technologists": computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, manufacturing technologists, paralegals. These people are as much manual workers as they are knowledge workers; in fact, they usually spend far more time working with their hands than with their brains. But their manual work is based on a substantial amount of theoretical knowledge which can be acquired only through formal education, not through an apprenticeship. They are not, as a rule, much better paid than traditional skilled workers, but they see themselves as "professionals". Just as unskilled manual workers in manufacturing were the dominant social and political force in the 20th century, knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades. The new protectionism Structurally, too, the next society is already diverging from the society almost all of us still live in. The 20th century saw the rapid decline of the sector that had dominated society for 10,000 years: agriculture. In volume terms, farm production now is at least four or five times what it was before the first world war. But in 1913 farm products accounted for 70% of world trade, whereas now their share is at most 17%. In the early years of the 20th century, agriculture in most developed countries was the largest single contributor to GDP; now in rich countries its contribution has dwindled to the point of becoming marginal. And the farm population is down to a tiny proportion of the total. Manufacturing has travelled a long way down the same road. Since the second world war, manufacturing output in the developed world has probably tripled in volume, but inflation-adjusted manufacturing prices have fallen steadily, whereas the cost of prime knowledge products--health care and education--has tripled, again adjusted for inflation. The relative purchasing power of manufactured goods against knowledge products is now only one-fifth or one-sixth of what it was 50 years ago. Manufacturing employment in America has fallen from 35% of the workforce in the 1950s to less than half that now, without causing much social disruption. But it may be too much to hope for an equally easy transition in countries such as Japan or Germany, where blue-collar manufacturing workers still make up 25-30% of the labour force. The decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism The decline of farming as a producer of wealth and of livelihoods has allowed farm protectionism to spread to a degree that would have been unthinkable before the second world war. In the same way, the decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism--even as lip service continues to be paid to free trade. This protectionism may not necessarily take the form of traditional tariffs, but of subsidies, quotas and regulations of all kinds. Even more likely, regional blocks will emerge that trade freely internally but are highly protectionist externally. The European Union, NAFTA and Mercosur already point in that direction. The future of the corporation Statistically, multinational companies play much the same part in the world economy as they did in 1913. But they have become very different animals. Multinationals in 1913 were domestic firms with subsidiaries abroad, each of them self-contained, in charge of a politically defined territory, and highly autonomous. Multinationals now tend to be organised globally along product or service lines. But like the multinationals of 1913, they are held together and controlled by ownership. By contrast, the multinationals of 2025 are likely to be held together and controlled by strategy. There will still be ownership, of course. But alliances, joint ventures, minority stakes, know-how agreements and contracts will increasingly be the building blocks of a confederation. This kind of organisation will need a new kind of top management. In most countries, and even in a good many large and complex companies, top management is still seen as an extension of operating management. Tomorrow's top management, however, is likely to be a distinct and separate organ: it will stand for the company. One of the most important jobs ahead for the top management of the big company of tomorrow, and especially of the multinational, will be to balance the conflicting demands on business being made by the need for both short-term and long-term results, and by the corporation's various constituencies: customers, shareholders (especially institutional investors and pension funds), knowledge employees and communities. Against that background, this survey will seek to answer two questions: what can and should managements do now to be ready for the next society? And what other big changes may lie ahead of which we are as yet unaware? * Peter Drucker is a writer, teacher and consultant who has published 32 books, mostly on various aspects of society, economics, politics and management. Born in 1909 in Vienna, Mr Drucker was educated in Austria and England, and holds a doctorate from Frankfurt University. Since 1971 he has been Professor of Social Science and Management at Claremont Graduate University, California. -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: D3701NF1.gif Type: image/gif Size: 18286 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CSU933.gif Type: image/gif Size: 32393 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 3801SU1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5618 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Nov 27 00:22:47 2005 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:22:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > So here's the problem: Since August 05, I have not been able to stop > researching specific fields. > My question: In June I did something I have never done before, a > drug. It > was a very > overwhelming fantastic experience for I thought of things never in my > wildest dreams could > I have imagined. > Could this drug have caused this effect? If by "this effect" you mean your researching - it's possible, but unlikely. Being fascinated by a certain subject is an entirely natural phenomenom, even to the point of becoming literally addicted to finding out everything you can about it. As addictions go, it's one of the more harmless ones (aside from the effects of spending a lot of time on any one thing, if it leads to neglecting your normal social duties, like your job). Depending on the subject, it can even be a socially beneficial addiction (for instance, there are some jobs which consist mostly of researching various topics). > I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving > you > permission to make my > e-mails public. Check your "To:" headers in the material you quoted. You sent your email to the list. I sent my reply to the list. None of the emails that I have seen from you so far have been private, including the ones I am replying to here. If you want official evidence, the list archives - available via http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat - will show that, indeed, every email you have sent to me on this thread went via the list. Or if you want to lodge an official complaint, perhaps this list's moderators can look at the archives and confirm what I am saying: I have, in this thread, so far only responded to emails that you sent to the list. --- Anna Tylor wrote: > Dear Mr. Tymes > I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving > you > permission to make my > e-mails public. So therefore if you would be so kind to > refrain from e-mailing anybody else what I write I would ever be > grateful. > Thanking you for the last time > Anna > > > > >From: Adrian Tymes > >Reply-To: ExI chat list > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out > >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) > > > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the > first > > > time I > > > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > > > >No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > > > > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet > the > > > way I > > > >communicate > > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. > > > >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating > >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other > people > >to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand > >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to > >others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a > >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - > >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple > terms > >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > > > > > Anyhow > > > >thank you for > > > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes > could > > > you at > > > >least look > > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of > it > > > makes > > > >sense, it would be much appreciated. > > > >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added > more > >comments. I shall respond to those. > > > > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > > >computational leverage > > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > > > extent that > > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience > > > >Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. > > > >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among > those > >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance > the > >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new > >mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by > >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they > are > >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly > and > >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical > terms, > >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their > body. > > > > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the > universe > > > (such > > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > > > physics > > > >consistency arguments. > > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and > graphing, > > > a human > > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up > with > > > simple, > > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > > > >>huge knowledge and expertise. > > > >Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the > path > >to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected > >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or > >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) > >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more > clearly. > >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term > >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you > >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still > >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only > works > >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your > >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other > >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are > trying > >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. > > > >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. > Yes, > >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to > >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training > and > >experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it > is > >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they > >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of > any > >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen > to > >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained > >individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, > >as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too > inaccurate > >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at > least > >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want > to > >spend their limited time.) > > > >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of > the > >trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very > well > >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well > >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each > >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's > specialty. > >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to > >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 > year > >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said > >child), for example. > > > > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > > > sparse, high > > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > > > observer > > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of > inertial > > > frame > > > >properties). > > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > > > framework). > > > >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. > > > >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the > >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its > >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn > to > >when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it > often > >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since > many > >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet > >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even > though > >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily > >used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such > as > >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never > >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the > >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, > >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept > >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his > >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval > >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the > >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can > be > >found online. > > > >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and > >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results > >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - > >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic > >description of the concept. > > > >And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the > >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost > >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My > >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as > >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do > >have all the time in the world to give you information, or > effectively > >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on > these > >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend > >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone > >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ > > > >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking > >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is > >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this > >alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and > you > >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's > like > >to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a > lot, > >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what > it's > >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). > > > >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to > >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing > >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at > >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > > >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar > lines. > >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got > >other things I need to do tonight. > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _________________________________________________________________ > Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the > Internet has > to offer. > http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > > Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get > the > first two months FREE*. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Nov 27 00:32:09 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:32:09 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: References: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Due to the death of my beloved brother, I have been a little out of communication recently. I did had a good laugh the other day, thanks to Damien's post. Otherwise, I'm just lurking. Nonetheless, I saw a message about sending private posts to the list. Sometimes this is done unwittingly. But please be careful not to send private emails to the list. Thx - Natasha Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From femmechakra at hotmail.com Sun Nov 27 01:07:28 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:07:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >From: Adrian Tymes >Check your "To:" headers in the material you quoted. You sent your >email to the list. I sent my reply to the list. None of the emails >that I have seen from you so far have been private, including the ones >I am replying to here. If you want official evidence, the list >archives - available via >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat - will show >that, indeed, every email you have sent to me on this thread went via >the list. Or if you want to lodge an official complaint, perhaps this >list's moderators can look at the archives and confirm what I am >saying: I have, in this thread, so far only responded to emails that >you sent to the list. Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky from the Singularity Institute. He forwarded my message to you...I didn't agree to to be posted or heard. I just wanted an opinion. >From: Adrian Tymes >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:22:47 -0800 (PST) > > > So here's the problem: Since August 05, I have not been able to stop > > researching specific fields. > > > My question: In June I did something I have never done before, a > > drug. It > > was a very > > overwhelming fantastic experience for I thought of things never in my > > wildest dreams could > > I have imagined. > > Could this drug have caused this effect? > >If by "this effect" you mean your researching - it's possible, but >unlikely. Being fascinated by a certain subject is an entirely natural >phenomenom, even to the point of becoming literally addicted to finding >out everything you can about it. As addictions go, it's one of the >more harmless ones (aside from the effects of spending a lot of time on >any one thing, if it leads to neglecting your normal social duties, >like your job). Depending on the subject, it can even be a socially >beneficial addiction (for instance, there are some jobs which consist >mostly of researching various topics). > > > I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving > > you > > permission to make my > > e-mails public. > >Check your "To:" headers in the material you quoted. You sent your >email to the list. I sent my reply to the list. None of the emails >that I have seen from you so far have been private, including the ones >I am replying to here. If you want official evidence, the list >archives - available via >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat - will show >that, indeed, every email you have sent to me on this thread went via >the list. Or if you want to lodge an official complaint, perhaps this >list's moderators can look at the archives and confirm what I am >saying: I have, in this thread, so far only responded to emails that >you sent to the list. > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > > Dear Mr. Tymes > > I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving > > you > > permission to make my > > e-mails public. So therefore if you would be so kind to > > refrain from e-mailing anybody else what I write I would ever be > > grateful. > > Thanking you for the last time > > Anna > > > > > > > > >From: Adrian Tymes > > >Reply-To: ExI chat list > > >To: ExI chat list > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out > > >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST) > > > > > >--- Anna Tylor wrote: > > > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the > > first > > > > time I > > > > >have ever posted anything. My apologies to everyone. > > > > > >No worries. Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time. > > > > > > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet > > the > > > > way I > > > > >communicate > > > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it. > > > > > >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating > > >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other > > people > > >to understand something. It does not matter how well you understand > > >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to > > >others. Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a > > >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child - > > >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple > > terms > > >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand). > > > > > > > Anyhow > > > > >thank you for > > > > >taking the time to respond. If you do have a few more minutes > > could > > > > you at > > > > >least look > > > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of > > it > > > > makes > > > > >sense, it would be much appreciated. > > > > > >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added > > more > > >comments. I shall respond to those. > > > > > > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of > > > > >computational leverage > > > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an > > > > extent that > > > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience > > > > > >Your restatement is clearer. You should use that instead. > > > > > >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among > > those > > >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance > > the > > >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new > > >mind-body experience". This is an extension of the old concept by > > >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they > > are > > >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly > > and > > >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical > > terms, > > >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their > > body. > > > > > > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the > > universe > > > > (such > > > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern > > > > physics > > > > >consistency arguments. > > > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and > > graphing, > > > > a human > > > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up > > with > > > > simple, > > > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have > > > > >>huge knowledge and expertise. > > > > > >Again your restatement is clearer. I believe that you are on the > > path > > >to a much clearer document. Perhaps it would work if you collected > > >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or > > >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it) > > >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more > > clearly. > > >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term > > >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you > > >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still > > >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.) This only > > works > > >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your > > >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other > > >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are > > trying > > >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work. > > > > > >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. > > Yes, > > >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to > > >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training > > and > > >experience. In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it > > is > > >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they > > >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of > > any > > >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen > > to > > >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained > > >individual. (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare, > > >as their training makes their time valuable. It is not too > > inaccurate > > >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at > > least > > >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want > > to > > >spend their limited time.) > > > > > >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of > > the > > >trained individual's training. A typical CFO is usually not very > > well > > >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well > > >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each > > >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's > > specialty. > > >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to > > >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10 > > year > > >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said > > >child), for example. > > > > > > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a > > > > sparse, high > > > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized > > > > observer > > > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of > > inertial > > > > frame > > > > >properties). > > > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that > > > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can > > > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have > > > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use > > > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer > > > > framework). > > > > > >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree. > > > > > >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the > > >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its > > >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn > > to > > >when trying to validate new ideas. If you've thought of it, it > > often > > >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since > > many > > >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet > > >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even > > though > > >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily > > >used for even less time). There are a certain few exceptions, such > > as > > >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never > > >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the > > >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast, > > >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept > > >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his > > >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval > > >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the > > >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can > > be > > >found online. > > > > > >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and > > >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results > > >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which - > > >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic > > >description of the concept. > > > > > >And so forth. Quite a lot of people on this list would take the > > >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost > > >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things. My > > >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as > > >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do > > >have all the time in the world to give you information, or > > effectively > > >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on > > these > > >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend > > >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone > > >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/ > > > > > >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking > > >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible. This is > > >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this > > >alternate path, but *you* did not. However, you know it now - and > > you > > >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's > > like > > >to use it a lot. There are enough people who really do use it a > > lot, > > >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what > > it's > > >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet). > > > > > >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to > > >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing > > >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at > > >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > > > > >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar > > lines. > > >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got > > >other things I need to do tonight. > > >_______________________________________________ > > >extropy-chat mailing list > > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the > > Internet has > > to offer. > > >http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > > > > Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get > > the > > first two months FREE*. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 _________________________________________________________________ Designer Mail isn't just fun to send, it's fun to receive. Use special stationery, fonts and colors. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 27 01:16:25 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:16:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] xmas humor again In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511232045x17168260s@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511270116.jAR1Gke04506@tick.javien.com> In the U.S. it is considered in poor taste to start Christmas sale ads before Thanksgiving, so these tend to appear within approximately five nanoseconds after the actual dishes are cleared. Clearly the genetic instructions for how to shop are found on that part of the X chromosome that we boys lack. On a scale of 1 to 10, we rank just below worm poop. But I had some breakthrough insights today from my feeble attempt to accomplish some actual retail trade, which came from the realization that if one rearranges the letters in "Xmas Sale" one can make the phrase "sex lamas." This might at first be taken as mere coincidence or some reference to the hairy beasts of South American Andes, but of course these are spelled with two Ls (at least two). Granted there are those who advocate this unnatural practice, but the term lama actually has an entirely different meaning. First we must recognize that the Dalai Lama is a monk whose first name is not actually Dalai, but rather it is more like a title, with a meaning towards great ocean of wisdom or really-high-up humbler-than-thou monk. So then one can see that a lama is any one of those clean shaven Buddhist monks who tend to hang out in Tibetan monasteries. But the clean shaven part is the real clue: the fact that they wear those loose robes with heads and faces always shaven makes it difficult to distinguish the gender. So the insight is that many, if not most of the lamas are actually female. Those places where they supposedly sit around and ohmmmm all day are not monasteries at all but rather bi-steries. And you know what must be going on there. But back to sales. If you see that Xmas Sale sign, you now know what they are really advertising. Yup. The retailers know that every December, herds of guys show up at the shopping center having little more than a vague clue of what we are supposed to be actually doing there other than wandering about like lost sheep. So the "Xmas sale" lends a bit of, shall we say, comfort. Notice that those electronics stores that advertise "laptops" never actually say in the ads that they are referring to computers? So now you know. To take advantage of this "Xmas sale" (nudge wink), one must look around for the cool hip-looking cat, likely in some expensive suit with lots of bling-bling. Furtively sidle up to him and give the pass-phrase. If you do not know what it is, use the universal-sounds-like-a-pass-phrase "the aardvark is in the kayak." If he flees in panic, that isn't the right guy. Try the cat out front ringing a bell, for he often knows how to get the best lamas. So where do these lamas do their thing, you may well ask. Surely you been in a department store, and they were out of the item you wanted and the sales-human says "hold on, I'll check in the back." Evidently most of the merchandise that is ever sold is located in this mysterious "back." The obvious questions come to mind: Why is there a back? Why wouldn't they tear down the wall between the back and the front, then just display everything they actually have in stock?" I'll tell you why: the back is also where these lamas do their thing, that's why. You wonder why people work at Walmart, with all the mistreatment and low pay? They work there for the sex lamas, you can be sure, the ones that also serve the general public for that one month a year. spike From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 01:14:55 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:14:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051125183236.93678.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051125183236.93678.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:32:36 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" > wrote: > >> Stu, if you don't understand something, just call it >> "magic", don't barbarize decent physics. If this werethe SL4 list, I >> would let you go >> on posting, but I would require that you not use the >> word "boson" for >> another year. > > Eli, while I am not an expert in QED, what is wrong > with my usage of bosons? Bosons are integer spin > particles that have unusual properties of being able > to colocalize with each other (photons are an example > as are gluons). I saw value in Stu's argument not because of any alleged properties specific to bosons but because of his reference to their phase entanglement. I don't like my own use of anthropomorphic language here, but one might say that phase entangled particles "monitor" one another. That "monitoring" may be at the root of what we normally mean by consciousness. The physical concept of phase entanglement is consistent with the philosophical concept of pan-psychism. -gts From outlawpoet at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 01:29:19 2005 From: outlawpoet at gmail.com (justin corwin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:29:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: References: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3ad827f30511261729j2bf3c487v4d62e064f2f6d7e5@mail.gmail.com> On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: > Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky from the > Singularity Institute. > He forwarded my message to you...I didn't agree to to be posted or heard. I > just wanted an opinion. If it helps, I've seen a fairly complete-looking, (if bizarre) conversation, between you and Adrian Tymes, starting when you posted a rather long screed starting "A mind-body thing is proposed.." or similar. It looked like it came from you, and I've seen nothing other than your mention of Eliezer Yudkowsky to link it to anybody else. -- Justin Corwin outlawpoet at hell.com http://outlawpoet.blogspot.com http://www.adaptiveai.com From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 27 01:47:19 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:47:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511270147.jAR1lVe08039@tick.javien.com> Natasha, so sorry to hear of your brother's passing. Reviewing, I see that Anna Tylor apparently accidently sent stuff to the list that she may have meant to send privately to Adrian. No foul, play ball. spike _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Natasha Vita-More Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails Due to the death of my beloved brother, I have been a little out of communication recently. I did had a good laugh the other day, thanks to Damien's post. Otherwise, I'm just lurking. Nonetheless, I saw a message about sending private posts to the list. Sometimes this is done unwittingly. But please be careful not to send private emails to the list. Thx - Natasha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 02:04:12 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:34:12 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511261804r78c8b8b6t@mail.gmail.com> On 26/11/05, gts wrote: > On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 16:34 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > > We might value such a [qualia] gene a great deal but to Natural > > Selection it's useless, in fact to Natural > > Selection it's invisible. > > Why useless and invisible? Presumably animals run from forest fires > because they smell, hear, see, or feel them. All qualia. > > -gts Funny, they just seem like mundane physical inputs to me. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 39229 (http://nanowrimo.org) From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 27 02:30:05 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:30:05 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] In Memory of Peter Drucker Message-ID: <43891A2D.2020509@mindspring.com> [In memory of Peter Drucker who died November 11th, almost 96. -Terry] Also, see: < http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5165460 > [Trusting the teacher in the grey-flannel suit] < http://www.economist.com/surveys/displayStory.cfm?story_id=770819 > Surveys SURVEY: THE NEAR FUTURE The next society Nov 1st 2001 >From The Economist print edition Tomorrow is closer than you think. Peter Drucker* explains how it will differ from today, and what needs to be done to prepare for it THE new economy may or may not materialise, but there is no doubt that the next society will be with us shortly. In the developed world, and probably in the emerging countries as well, this new society will be a good deal more important than the new economy (if any). It will be quite different from the society of the late 20th century, and also different from what most people expect. Much of it will be unprecedented. And most of it is already here, or is rapidly emerging. In the developed countries, the dominant factor in the next society will be something to which most people are only just beginning to pay attention: the rapid growth in the older population and the rapid shrinking of the younger generation. Politicians everywhere still promise to save the existing pensions system, but they--and their constituents--know perfectly well that in another 25 years people will have to keep working until their mid-70s, health permitting. What has not yet sunk in is that a growing number of older people--say those over 50--will not keep on working as traditional full-time nine-to-five employees, but will participate in the labour force in many new and different ways: as temporaries, as part-timers, as consultants, on special assignments and so on. What used to be personnel and are now known as human-resources departments still assume that those who work for an organisation are full-time employees. Employment laws and regulations are based on the same assumption. Within 20 or 25 years, however, perhaps as many as half the people who work for an organisation will not be employed by it, certainly not on a full-time basis. This will be especially true for older people. New ways of working with people at arm's length will increasingly become the central managerial issue of employing organisations, and not just of businesses. The shrinking of the younger population will cause an even greater upheaval, if only because nothing like this has happened since the dying centuries of the Roman empire. In every single developed country, but also in China and Brazil, the birth rate is now well below the replacement rate of 2.2 live births per woman of reproductive age. Politically, this means that immigration will become an important--and highly divisive--issue in all rich countries. It will cut across all traditional political alignments. Economically, the decline in the young population will change markets in fundamental ways. Growth in family formation has been the driving force of all domestic markets in the developed world, but the rate of family formation is certain to fall steadily unless bolstered by large-scale immigration of younger people. The homogeneous mass market that emerged in all rich countries after the second world war has been youth-determined from the start. It will now become middle-age-determined, or perhaps more likely it will split into two: a middle-age-determined mass market and a much smaller youth-determined one. And because the supply of young people will shrink, creating new employment patterns to attract and hold the growing number of older people (especially older educated people) will become increasingly important. Knowledge is all The next society will be a knowledge society. Knowledge will be its key resource, and knowledge workers will be the dominant group in its workforce. Its three main characteristics will be: .Borderlessness, because knowledge travels even more effortlessly than money. .Upward mobility, available to everyone through easily acquired formal education. .The potential for failure as well as success. Anyone can acquire the "means of production", ie, the knowledge required for the job, but not everyone can win. Together, those three characteristics will make the knowledge society a highly competitive one, for organisations and individuals alike. Information technology, although only one of many new features of the next society, is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society--not only businesses, but also schools, universities, hospitals and increasingly government agencies too--has to be globally competitive, even though most organisations will continue to be local in their activities and in their markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at what price. Knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades This new knowledge economy will rely heavily on knowledge workers. At present, this term is widely used to describe people with considerable theoretical knowledge and learning: doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, chemical engineers. But the most striking growth will be in "knowledge technologists": computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, manufacturing technologists, paralegals. These people are as much manual workers as they are knowledge workers; in fact, they usually spend far more time working with their hands than with their brains. But their manual work is based on a substantial amount of theoretical knowledge which can be acquired only through formal education, not through an apprenticeship. They are not, as a rule, much better paid than traditional skilled workers, but they see themselves as "professionals". Just as unskilled manual workers in manufacturing were the dominant social and political force in the 20th century, knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades. The new protectionism Structurally, too, the next society is already diverging from the society almost all of us still live in. The 20th century saw the rapid decline of the sector that had dominated society for 10,000 years: agriculture. In volume terms, farm production now is at least four or five times what it was before the first world war. But in 1913 farm products accounted for 70% of world trade, whereas now their share is at most 17%. In the early years of the 20th century, agriculture in most developed countries was the largest single contributor to GDP; now in rich countries its contribution has dwindled to the point of becoming marginal. And the farm population is down to a tiny proportion of the total. Manufacturing has travelled a long way down the same road. Since the second world war, manufacturing output in the developed world has probably tripled in volume, but inflation-adjusted manufacturing prices have fallen steadily, whereas the cost of prime knowledge products--health care and education--has tripled, again adjusted for inflation. The relative purchasing power of manufactured goods against knowledge products is now only one-fifth or one-sixth of what it was 50 years ago. Manufacturing employment in America has fallen from 35% of the workforce in the 1950s to less than half that now, without causing much social disruption. But it may be too much to hope for an equally easy transition in countries such as Japan or Germany, where blue-collar manufacturing workers still make up 25-30% of the labour force. The decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism The decline of farming as a producer of wealth and of livelihoods has allowed farm protectionism to spread to a degree that would have been unthinkable before the second world war. In the same way, the decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism--even as lip service continues to be paid to free trade. This protectionism may not necessarily take the form of traditional tariffs, but of subsidies, quotas and regulations of all kinds. Even more likely, regional blocks will emerge that trade freely internally but are highly protectionist externally. The European Union, NAFTA and Mercosur already point in that direction. The future of the corporation Statistically, multinational companies play much the same part in the world economy as they did in 1913. But they have become very different animals. Multinationals in 1913 were domestic firms with subsidiaries abroad, each of them self-contained, in charge of a politically defined territory, and highly autonomous. Multinationals now tend to be organised globally along product or service lines. But like the multinationals of 1913, they are held together and controlled by ownership. By contrast, the multinationals of 2025 are likely to be held together and controlled by strategy. There will still be ownership, of course. But alliances, joint ventures, minority stakes, know-how agreements and contracts will increasingly be the building blocks of a confederation. This kind of organisation will need a new kind of top management. In most countries, and even in a good many large and complex companies, top management is still seen as an extension of operating management. Tomorrow's top management, however, is likely to be a distinct and separate organ: it will stand for the company. One of the most important jobs ahead for the top management of the big company of tomorrow, and especially of the multinational, will be to balance the conflicting demands on business being made by the need for both short-term and long-term results, and by the corporation's various constituencies: customers, shareholders (especially institutional investors and pension funds), knowledge employees and communities. Against that background, this survey will seek to answer two questions: what can and should managements do now to be ready for the next society? And what other big changes may lie ahead of which we are as yet unaware? * Peter Drucker is a writer, teacher and consultant who has published 32 books, mostly on various aspects of society, economics, politics and management. Born in 1909 in Vienna, Mr Drucker was educated in Austria and England, and holds a doctorate from Frankfurt University. Since 1971 he has been Professor of Social Science and Management at Claremont Graduate University, California. -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sentience at pobox.com Sun Nov 27 02:35:39 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:35:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511261729j2bf3c487v4d62e064f2f6d7e5@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <3ad827f30511261729j2bf3c487v4d62e064f2f6d7e5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43891B7B.9040806@pobox.com> justin corwin wrote: > On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: > >>Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky from the >>Singularity Institute. >>He forwarded my message to you...I didn't agree to to be posted or heard. I >>just wanted an opinion. > > If it helps, I've seen a fairly complete-looking, (if bizarre) > conversation, between you and Adrian Tymes, starting when you posted a > rather long screed starting "A mind-body thing is proposed.." or > similar. It looked like it came from you, and I've seen nothing other > than your mention of Eliezer Yudkowsky to link it to anybody else. Just for the record, AFAIK I haven't forwarded anything from Anna Tylor anywhere. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From femmechakra at hotmail.com Sun Nov 27 02:43:36 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:43:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <43891B7B.9040806@pobox.com> Message-ID: You are a liar...Eliezer Yudkowsky >From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: outlawpoet at hell.com, ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out >Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:35:39 -0800 > >justin corwin wrote: >>On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: >> >>>Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky from the >>>Singularity Institute. >>>He forwarded my message to you...I didn't agree to to be posted or heard. >>>I >>>just wanted an opinion. >> >>If it helps, I've seen a fairly complete-looking, (if bizarre) >>conversation, between you and Adrian Tymes, starting when you posted a >>rather long screed starting "A mind-body thing is proposed.." or >>similar. It looked like it came from you, and I've seen nothing other >>than your mention of Eliezer Yudkowsky to link it to anybody else. > >Just for the record, AFAIK I haven't forwarded anything from Anna Tylor >anywhere. > >-- >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ >Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft? SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 27 02:44:43 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:44:43 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] In Memory of Peter Drucker Message-ID: <43891D9B.6060306@mindspring.com> [In memory of Peter Drucker who died November 11th, almost 96. -Terry] Also, see: < http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5165460 > [Trusting the teacher in the grey-flannel suit] < http://www.economist.com/surveys/displayStory.cfm?story_id=770819 > Surveys SURVEY: THE NEAR FUTURE The next society Nov 1st 2001 >From The Economist print edition Tomorrow is closer than you think. Peter Drucker* explains how it will differ from today, and what needs to be done to prepare for it THE new economy may or may not materialise, but there is no doubt that the next society will be with us shortly. In the developed world, and probably in the emerging countries as well, this new society will be a good deal more important than the new economy (if any). It will be quite different from the society of the late 20th century, and also different from what most people expect. Much of it will be unprecedented. And most of it is already here, or is rapidly emerging. In the developed countries, the dominant factor in the next society will be something to which most people are only just beginning to pay attention: the rapid growth in the older population and the rapid shrinking of the younger generation. Politicians everywhere still promise to save the existing pensions system, but they--and their constituents--know perfectly well that in another 25 years people will have to keep working until their mid-70s, health permitting. What has not yet sunk in is that a growing number of older people--say those over 50--will not keep on working as traditional full-time nine-to-five employees, but will participate in the labour force in many new and different ways: as temporaries, as part-timers, as consultants, on special assignments and so on. What used to be personnel and are now known as human-resources departments still assume that those who work for an organisation are full-time employees. Employment laws and regulations are based on the same assumption. Within 20 or 25 years, however, perhaps as many as half the people who work for an organisation will not be employed by it, certainly not on a full-time basis. This will be especially true for older people. New ways of working with people at arm's length will increasingly become the central managerial issue of employing organisations, and not just of businesses. The shrinking of the younger population will cause an even greater upheaval, if only because nothing like this has happened since the dying centuries of the Roman empire. In every single developed country, but also in China and Brazil, the birth rate is now well below the replacement rate of 2.2 live births per woman of reproductive age. Politically, this means that immigration will become an important--and highly divisive--issue in all rich countries. It will cut across all traditional political alignments. Economically, the decline in the young population will change markets in fundamental ways. Growth in family formation has been the driving force of all domestic markets in the developed world, but the rate of family formation is certain to fall steadily unless bolstered by large-scale immigration of younger people. The homogeneous mass market that emerged in all rich countries after the second world war has been youth-determined from the start. It will now become middle-age-determined, or perhaps more likely it will split into two: a middle-age-determined mass market and a much smaller youth-determined one. And because the supply of young people will shrink, creating new employment patterns to attract and hold the growing number of older people (especially older educated people) will become increasingly important. Knowledge is all The next society will be a knowledge society. Knowledge will be its key resource, and knowledge workers will be the dominant group in its workforce. Its three main characteristics will be: .Borderlessness, because knowledge travels even more effortlessly than money. .Upward mobility, available to everyone through easily acquired formal education. .The potential for failure as well as success. Anyone can acquire the "means of production", ie, the knowledge required for the job, but not everyone can win. Together, those three characteristics will make the knowledge society a highly competitive one, for organisations and individuals alike. Information technology, although only one of many new features of the next society, is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society--not only businesses, but also schools, universities, hospitals and increasingly government agencies too--has to be globally competitive, even though most organisations will continue to be local in their activities and in their markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at what price. Knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades This new knowledge economy will rely heavily on knowledge workers. At present, this term is widely used to describe people with considerable theoretical knowledge and learning: doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, chemical engineers. But the most striking growth will be in "knowledge technologists": computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, manufacturing technologists, paralegals. These people are as much manual workers as they are knowledge workers; in fact, they usually spend far more time working with their hands than with their brains. But their manual work is based on a substantial amount of theoretical knowledge which can be acquired only through formal education, not through an apprenticeship. They are not, as a rule, much better paid than traditional skilled workers, but they see themselves as "professionals". Just as unskilled manual workers in manufacturing were the dominant social and political force in the 20th century, knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades. The new protectionism Structurally, too, the next society is already diverging from the society almost all of us still live in. The 20th century saw the rapid decline of the sector that had dominated society for 10,000 years: agriculture. In volume terms, farm production now is at least four or five times what it was before the first world war. But in 1913 farm products accounted for 70% of world trade, whereas now their share is at most 17%. In the early years of the 20th century, agriculture in most developed countries was the largest single contributor to GDP; now in rich countries its contribution has dwindled to the point of becoming marginal. And the farm population is down to a tiny proportion of the total. Manufacturing has travelled a long way down the same road. Since the second world war, manufacturing output in the developed world has probably tripled in volume, but inflation-adjusted manufacturing prices have fallen steadily, whereas the cost of prime knowledge products--health care and education--has tripled, again adjusted for inflation. The relative purchasing power of manufactured goods against knowledge products is now only one-fifth or one-sixth of what it was 50 years ago. Manufacturing employment in America has fallen from 35% of the workforce in the 1950s to less than half that now, without causing much social disruption. But it may be too much to hope for an equally easy transition in countries such as Japan or Germany, where blue-collar manufacturing workers still make up 25-30% of the labour force. The decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism The decline of farming as a producer of wealth and of livelihoods has allowed farm protectionism to spread to a degree that would have been unthinkable before the second world war. In the same way, the decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism--even as lip service continues to be paid to free trade. This protectionism may not necessarily take the form of traditional tariffs, but of subsidies, quotas and regulations of all kinds. Even more likely, regional blocks will emerge that trade freely internally but are highly protectionist externally. The European Union, NAFTA and Mercosur already point in that direction. The future of the corporation Statistically, multinational companies play much the same part in the world economy as they did in 1913. But they have become very different animals. Multinationals in 1913 were domestic firms with subsidiaries abroad, each of them self-contained, in charge of a politically defined territory, and highly autonomous. Multinationals now tend to be organised globally along product or service lines. But like the multinationals of 1913, they are held together and controlled by ownership. By contrast, the multinationals of 2025 are likely to be held together and controlled by strategy. There will still be ownership, of course. But alliances, joint ventures, minority stakes, know-how agreements and contracts will increasingly be the building blocks of a confederation. This kind of organisation will need a new kind of top management. In most countries, and even in a good many large and complex companies, top management is still seen as an extension of operating management. Tomorrow's top management, however, is likely to be a distinct and separate organ: it will stand for the company. One of the most important jobs ahead for the top management of the big company of tomorrow, and especially of the multinational, will be to balance the conflicting demands on business being made by the need for both short-term and long-term results, and by the corporation's various constituencies: customers, shareholders (especially institutional investors and pension funds), knowledge employees and communities. Against that background, this survey will seek to answer two questions: what can and should managements do now to be ready for the next society? And what other big changes may lie ahead of which we are as yet unaware? * Peter Drucker is a writer, teacher and consultant who has published 32 books, mostly on various aspects of society, economics, politics and management. Born in 1909 in Vienna, Mr Drucker was educated in Austria and England, and holds a doctorate from Frankfurt University. Since 1971 he has been Professor of Social Science and Management at Claremont Graduate University, California. -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 02:42:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:42:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511261804r78c8b8b6t@mail.gmail.com> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <710b78fc0511261804r78c8b8b6t@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:04:12 -0500, Emlyn wrote: >> Presumably animals run from forest fires because they smell, hear, see, >> or feel them. All qualia. > Funny, they just seem like mundane physical inputs to me. Oh? In your opinion, what is it like to be an animal threatened by a forest-fire? What does it feel like? Why are you running? -gts From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Nov 27 02:50:14 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:50:14 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: <200511270147.jAR1lVe08039@tick.javien.com> References: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <200511270147.jAR1lVe08039@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126204456.030098c8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> In deference to Adrian, an apology to him would be a polite thing to do. Thank you Anna, in advance, for taking care of this. Best wishes, Natasha Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 27 02:51:42 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:51:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <43891B7B.9040806@pobox.com> References: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <3ad827f30511261729j2bf3c487v4d62e064f2f6d7e5@mail.gmail.com> <43891B7B.9040806@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051126204059.01d39378@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:35 PM 11/26/2005 -0800, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: >>On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: >> >>>Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky > >Just for the record, AFAIK I haven't forwarded anything from Anna Tylor >anywhere. This is the confusing source of the trouble, see. Ms. Tylor's original reply came from Eduard Yudkovski, the celebrated Nordic painter and prankster. (You probably have a print pinned up over your workstation of his painting "I Munch Ice Cream".) He scrambled her messages to make her look like a brainless druggie, then cruelly broadcast them to extropy-chat and heaven knows where-all else. Note well this proof of Yudkovski's unparalleled low cunning: he then *signed up Ms. Tylor to the list*, which is how she managed to get ahold of these vicious prankster posts even though she'd never posted here. Nothing at all to do with Eliezer, nor Adrian, or possibly even spike (although I have my doubts about spike--really, I think he's spending far too much time enjoying the attentions of the sex lamas at Wal*Mart). David Broder From femmechakra at hotmail.com Sun Nov 27 03:06:21 2005 From: femmechakra at hotmail.com (Anna Tylor) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:06:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I have nothing to run from..Again I am an artist. Please tell me how to get rid of my name of the extropy site. post a site please >From: gts >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: "ExI chat list" >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. >Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:42:00 -0500 > >On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:04:12 -0500, Emlyn wrote: > >>>Presumably animals run from forest fires because they smell, hear, see, >>>or feel them. All qualia. > >>Funny, they just seem like mundane physical inputs to me. > >Oh? > >In your opinion, what is it like to be an animal threatened by a >forest-fire? What does it feel like? Why are you running? > >-gts > > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft? SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. From robert.bradbury at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 03:08:21 2005 From: robert.bradbury at gmail.com (Robert Bradbury) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:08:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: References: <20051125212028.32169.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: > Ok so here's the truth: > I am not and never will be a writer or a scientist, I am very well aware > of > this fact. My problem is a little bizarre and I need to talk to someone > about it or i'm going to lose my mind. [snip] So here's the problem: Since August 05, I have not been able to stop > researching specific fields. (In passing, the last time I researched > anything that wasn't in my field was over 8 years ago). > The Pyramids, the stars, AI and Time Travel. Nothing else. It almost > seems > like an addiction, every spare moment I have I jump on the net to > research. This might seem quite naturel to you, but for me it's extremely > bizarre. I have over 50 pages of notes and have spent hours and hours > trying to figure out what all of it means. Anna, you should not view this as "unusual". I've spent much of the last dozen or so years researching things. Went through something like 10 1000 page copy cards at the UW back in 92-93 when I was researching aging (no drugs other than those found in coffee involved). Now my bookmarks and saved articles on my hard drives tend to number in the hundreds to thousands. I often get the comment that I should consider teaching. Wanting to become an expert in one or more areas is a natural human trait (it tends to provide survival advantages if one chooses the area wisely). The Web and its ease of access to information simply may have enabled buried interests you may have had for many years. If you want to ask questions on some of the topics and don't want to consume list bandwidth, feel free to ask me by direct email. If it gets too detailed we could arrange to chat by phone. Just a word of caution -- in many areas such as AI and time travel which have various theories and proponents of those theories you are unlikely to find "consensus" on the extropian list. Be forewarned however that many people on the list are quite hard core with regard to the "rational thought" part of the Extropian Principles. There is certainly much information available on the Web which fails that type of analysis unfortunately. Presenting or asking about information relating to those failures of reasoning is likely to generate rather terse responses. To many people in the computer industry this is associated with the acronym/perspective of "RTFM". As Wikipedia usually has a pretty good system for approaching "neutral" ground I would recommend starting there with any concepts and then bring them to the Extropian List once you have a basic understanding of what is involved. Robert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Sun Nov 27 03:18:48 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:18:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051126204059.01d39378@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051127002247.86849.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <3ad827f30511261729j2bf3c487v4d62e064f2f6d7e5@mail.gmail.com> <43891B7B.9040806@pobox.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051126204059.01d39378@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <43892598.20309@goldenfuture.net> Thanks for the first real laugh I've had all day. Damien Broderick wrote: > At 06:35 PM 11/26/2005 -0800, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > >>> On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: >>> >>>> Let's get one thing straight. I e-mailed Edward Yudkowdsky >>> >> >> Just for the record, AFAIK I haven't forwarded anything from Anna >> Tylor anywhere. > > > This is the confusing source of the trouble, see. Ms. Tylor's original > reply came from Eduard Yudkovski, the celebrated Nordic painter and > prankster. (You probably have a print pinned up over your workstation > of his painting "I Munch Ice Cream".) He scrambled her messages to > make her look like a brainless druggie, then cruelly broadcast them to > extropy-chat and heaven knows where-all else. > > Note well this proof of Yudkovski's unparalleled low cunning: he then > *signed up Ms. Tylor to the list*, which is how she managed to get > ahold of these vicious prankster posts even though she'd never posted > here. Nothing at all to do with Eliezer, nor Adrian, or possibly even > spike (although I have my doubts about spike--really, I think he's > spending far too much time enjoying the attentions of the sex lamas at > Wal*Mart). > > David Broder > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 27 03:26:45 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:26:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511270327.jAR3R7e18126@tick.javien.com> Anna, You are moderated. spike > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anna Tylor > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out > > You are a liar...Eliezer Yudkowsky > ... > > > >Just for the record, AFAIK I haven't forwarded anything from Anna Tylor > >anywhere. > > > >-- > >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 27 04:21:36 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:21:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer><1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net><003001c5f291$e868a900$22044e0c@MyComputer><002601c5f2d9$e05a81a0$de084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <008101c5f30a$15e2e120$ab084e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > experiments have shown that people pull their hands away > from intense heat, such as that from a hot stove, a fraction of > a second before they become aware of the heat qualia. Yes so I've heard, but for simple reflexes like that where speed is all important the command to pull away may not even come from the brain but from the spinal cord, rather like the knee jerk reaction. > the fact that evolution produced aware organisms capable of experiencing > qualia does not "completely close the book" on the possibility that it > might have done otherwise. I think the Evolutionary record proves that conscious intelligence is easier to make than unconscious intelligence. I would go further, the fact that genetic drift has not eliminated consciousness (at least in my case, I don't know about you) would seem to indicate that unconscious intelligence is not just difficult but downright imposable. John K Clark From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 07:03:48 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:03:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <008101c5f30a$15e2e120$ab084e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > > I think the Evolutionary record proves that > conscious intelligence is easier > to make than unconscious intelligence. It all depends on your definition of intelligence. If you assert that consciousness is a necessary pre-requisite for intelligence, then by definition, you are correct. But if you simply define intelligence as the behaviorial trait of acting rationally (sort of like the Turing test), then the evolutionary record shows exactly the opposite. The whole of life behaves rationally in a great deal many ways and most likely always has or it would not have survived. GTS (sorry I don't know your name) has often invoked the example of animals running from a forest fire and this is obviously a rational choice for the animals. Is this a sign of intelligence? IMNSHO yes. A vacant automobile with the engine running would not make this decision. (I don't think that the grand challenge robot automobiles would make this decision either unless they were specifically programmed to do so.) In fact it is this fundamental sort of rational decision making that, after over a decade of dedicated biology study by myself, is the only behavioriol trait that to me truly distinguishes the behavior of biological life from the flames of the forest fire. (After all flames respire, metabolize, grow, reproduce, and eventually die.) Moreover this rational decision making exists at all scales of life from the level of the simplest micro-organisms to entire populations and ecosystems. For example a simple flaggelated bacterium will swim away from a drop of vinegar placed on a microscope slide, while predators and prey in an ecosystem will spontaneously reach a Nash equibrium with both species making the most rational decision possible in light of their opponent's strategy. Thus if rationality is the criterion for intelligence then all life can be said to be, to a lesser or greater extent intelligent. Indeed such complex rational behavioral traits as agriculture and animal husbandry were practiced by ants long before Homo sapiens came on the scene. > I would go > further, the fact that > genetic drift has not eliminated consciousness (at > least in my case, I don't > know about you) would seem to indicate that > unconscious intelligence is not > just difficult but downright imposable. No, it simply means that most people prefer conscious mates to unconscious ones (except perhaps college frat boys at a party) when the choice presents itself. Remember that a lot more goes into human courtship than purely rational behavior. Ergo there is a positive selective pressure for consciousness in humans. This however does not invalidate John's contention that consciousness and intelligence are observationally correlated. But neither does it invalidate GTS's belief in pan-psychism, since there is obviously a continuum of intelligence in nature such that humans are more intelligent than birds which are more intelligent than insects. Thus if the two phenomena were 100% correlated, one would have to admit that a bacterium was a tiny bit conscious. I will have to think more about pan-psychism before I can say much more about it other than it is not inconsistent with pan-vitalism which I believe may be the origin of life in the universe. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 07:15:37 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:15:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051127071537.58844.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> --- Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > Due to the death of my beloved brother, I have been > a little out of > communication recently. My sincere condolences, Natasha. "A man [or woman] dies as many times as he loses a dear one." -Publius Syrus. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 07:43:23 2005 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 08:43:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Tomorrow's People: the Challenges of Technologies for Life Extension and Enhancement In-Reply-To: <5752465.1133077002877.JavaMail.root@bla130.blogger.com> References: <5752465.1133077002877.JavaMail.root@bla130.blogger.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520511262343t47cd81e3v3ed3197d2f118c94@mail.gmail.com> Oxford, 14-17 March 2006, First World Forum on Science and Civilization - Tomorrow's People: the Challenges of Technologies for Life Extension and Enhancement . This Forum is one of the most interesting forthcoming events, and going to Oxford is always a pleasure. The list of speakers and panellists includes some very well known futurists, technologists and transhumanists. The session topics include some of the real "big issues" facing humankind. The event is organized by the James Martin Institute (see also the websites of The James Martin 21st Century School and The Future of Humanity Institute ). The Forum will take a close look at what some characterise as the next stage of evolution: conscious efforts by human beings to reshape their inherited physical, cognitive and emotional identities by extending lifespan and enhancing human capacities. It will examine the range of technologies offering lives that purport to be longer, stronger, smarter and happier. Leading scientists, scholars, business executives, policy makers, religious leaders and citizens will come together to explore what the promise of such technology means in different parts of the world, the implication for our ideas about what it means to be human, and whether and how such technology should be governed. Session topics will include: RADICAL EVOLUTION: what is it and what will it mean for humanity? REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES: how are the prospects of radical human evolution viewed around the world? LIVING LONGER? What are the prospects for radical life extension? LIVING STRONGER? How will humans re-engineer the human body? LIVING SMARTER? What are the implications of cognitive enhancement? LIVING HAPPIER? What makes us happy and can it be bottled? A FAIRER WORLD? What are the implications for human inequality? THE MEANING OF HUMAN NATURE: what is natural about us and does it matter? THE GOVERNANCE OF HUMAN TRANSFORMATION: is transformation a consumer choice or an imperative to exercise social responsibility? SHAPING ALTERNATIVE FUTURES: can we choose our future? The list of speakers and panellists is impressive. More details on the forum website and PDF brochure . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 15:39:19 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:39:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 02:03:48 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: I like the way this discussion is going. John says intelligent behavior is evidence of consciousness and Stu points out that flaggelated bacterium act intelligently when they swim away from a drop of vinegar. Bacteria have no obvious sense organs, and it's almost inconceivable that they have anything close to self-awareness, yet one can say they are aware of their environment. I would go further to say their awareness is in principle no different from the awareness of a mechanical camera. If we say bacteria are aware then we can say also that cameras are aware, the only difference being in the complexity of their responses. One could build a camera capable of responding intelligently to its inputs. In fact such cameras already exist. And if cameras are aware then isn't all matter aware at some very basic level? > I will have to think more about pan-psychism before I > can say much more about it other than it is not > inconsistent with pan-vitalism which I believe may be > the origin of life in the universe. Consider the possibility that the words "living" and "dead" have no real meaning. We say an object is alive if it can replicate, but there is nothing especially magical about replication -- it's only a matter of chemical reactions. Might just as well say the entire universe is alive: pan-psychism. It may be no coincidence that small children intuit pan-psychism. They talk to what we consider inert objects. Children are naive to think inert objects can understand words and respond, but perhaps their basic intuition is correct. -gts From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 27 15:54:23 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:54:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> "The Avantguardian" > It all depends on your definition of intelligence. I don't have a definition of intelligence and don't need or want one; examples are far more important than definitions. Intelligence is the sort of thing that Einstein had and rocks do not. > the example of animals running from a forest fire and this is > obviously a rational choice for the animals. Then machines have been rational for many years, any engineer with a few transistors could cobble together a machine that moved away from a heat source, and even bacteria move toward and away from various chemical gradients. That's not the sort of thing I mean when I say "Einstein was intelligent", and if you're honest with yourself that's not the sort of thing you mean either. > if the two phenomena were 100% correlated, one would have to > admit that a bacterium was a tiny bit conscious. Yea, and a cigarette lighter and a Supernova are really the same thing because they both produce a ball of plasma. > it simply means that most people prefer conscious > mates to unconscious ones And how can people tell if their mates (or anybody else for that matter) are conscious or unconscious? By the same way Natural Selection can tell, by way they behave of course. John K Clark From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 27 16:07:10 2005 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 11:07:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 27, 2005 10:54 AM John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote: >> It all depends on your definition of intelligence. > > I don't have a definition of intelligence and don't > need or want one; examples are far more > important than definitions. Intelligence is the sort > of thing that Einstein had and rocks do not. Which is a way of searching for a defining trait, no? Einstein had pants, hair, respiration, a degree, and the ability to speak German -- all things rocks lack. Eventually, you're going to have to do a little better than just list examples and you'll have the "moral equivalent" of a definition. Regards, Dan http://uweb1.superlink.net/~neptune/ From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 16:07:35 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 11:07:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:54:23 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > And how can people tell if their mates (or anybody else for that matter) > are conscious or unconscious? I'm thinking that what we call "consciousness" is nothing more than the ability to ponder one's awareness, and that this is just a matter of some extra circuitry. Higher organisms have it, lower organisms don't, but all organisms are aware. We can infer its existence in others when they report about their experience. Perhaps Rafal can help here. Rafal, I am assuming that a part of the brain stores memories of sense experience and that another part retrieves those memories. A brain lacking the second part would be analogous to an unconscious camera: aware but not self-aware. -gts From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 27 02:24:56 2005 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:24:56 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] In Memory of Peter Drucker Message-ID: <438918F8.1020906@mindspring.com> [In memory of Peter Drucker who died November 11th, almost 96. -Terry] Also, see: < http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5165460 > [Trusting the teacher in the grey-flannel suit] < http://www.economist.com/surveys/displayStory.cfm?story_id=770819 > Surveys SURVEY: THE NEAR FUTURE The next society Nov 1st 2001 >From The Economist print edition Tomorrow is closer than you think. Peter Drucker* explains how it will differ from today, and what needs to be done to prepare for it THE new economy may or may not materialise, but there is no doubt that the next society will be with us shortly. In the developed world, and probably in the emerging countries as well, this new society will be a good deal more important than the new economy (if any). It will be quite different from the society of the late 20th century, and also different from what most people expect. Much of it will be unprecedented. And most of it is already here, or is rapidly emerging. In the developed countries, the dominant factor in the next society will be something to which most people are only just beginning to pay attention: the rapid growth in the older population and the rapid shrinking of the younger generation. Politicians everywhere still promise to save the existing pensions system, but they--and their constituents--know perfectly well that in another 25 years people will have to keep working until their mid-70s, health permitting. What has not yet sunk in is that a growing number of older people--say those over 50--will not keep on working as traditional full-time nine-to-five employees, but will participate in the labour force in many new and different ways: as temporaries, as part-timers, as consultants, on special assignments and so on. What used to be personnel and are now known as human-resources departments still assume that those who work for an organisation are full-time employees. Employment laws and regulations are based on the same assumption. Within 20 or 25 years, however, perhaps as many as half the people who work for an organisation will not be employed by it, certainly not on a full-time basis. This will be especially true for older people. New ways of working with people at arm's length will increasingly become the central managerial issue of employing organisations, and not just of businesses. Click to enlarge The shrinking of the younger population will cause an even greater upheaval, if only because nothing like this has happened since the dying centuries of the Roman empire. In every single developed country, but also in China and Brazil, the birth rate is now well below the replacement rate of 2.2 live births per woman of reproductive age. Politically, this means that immigration will become an important--and highly divisive--issue in all rich countries. It will cut across all traditional political alignments. Economically, the decline in the young population will change markets in fundamental ways. Growth in family formation has been the driving force of all domestic markets in the developed world, but the rate of family formation is certain to fall steadily unless bolstered by large-scale immigration of younger people. The homogeneous mass market that emerged in all rich countries after the second world war has been youth-determined from the start. It will now become middle-age-determined, or perhaps more likely it will split into two: a middle-age-determined mass market and a much smaller youth-determined one. And because the supply of young people will shrink, creating new employment patterns to attract and hold the growing number of older people (especially older educated people) will become increasingly important. Knowledge is all The next society will be a knowledge society. Knowledge will be its key resource, and knowledge workers will be the dominant group in its workforce. Its three main characteristics will be: .Borderlessness, because knowledge travels even more effortlessly than money. .Upward mobility, available to everyone through easily acquired formal education. .The potential for failure as well as success. Anyone can acquire the "means of production", ie, the knowledge required for the job, but not everyone can win. Together, those three characteristics will make the knowledge society a highly competitive one, for organisations and individuals alike. Information technology, although only one of many new features of the next society, is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society--not only businesses, but also schools, universities, hospitals and increasingly government agencies too--has to be globally competitive, even though most organisations will continue to be local in their activities and in their markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at what price. Knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades This new knowledge economy will rely heavily on knowledge workers. At present, this term is widely used to describe people with considerable theoretical knowledge and learning: doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, chemical engineers. But the most striking growth will be in "knowledge technologists": computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, manufacturing technologists, paralegals. These people are as much manual workers as they are knowledge workers; in fact, they usually spend far more time working with their hands than with their brains. But their manual work is based on a substantial amount of theoretical knowledge which can be acquired only through formal education, not through an apprenticeship. They are not, as a rule, much better paid than traditional skilled workers, but they see themselves as "professionals". Just as unskilled manual workers in manufacturing were the dominant social and political force in the 20th century, knowledge technologists are likely to become the dominant social--and perhaps also political--force over the next decades. The new protectionism Structurally, too, the next society is already diverging from the society almost all of us still live in. The 20th century saw the rapid decline of the sector that had dominated society for 10,000 years: agriculture. In volume terms, farm production now is at least four or five times what it was before the first world war. But in 1913 farm products accounted for 70% of world trade, whereas now their share is at most 17%. In the early years of the 20th century, agriculture in most developed countries was the largest single contributor to GDP; now in rich countries its contribution has dwindled to the point of becoming marginal. And the farm population is down to a tiny proportion of the total. Manufacturing has travelled a long way down the same road. Since the second world war, manufacturing output in the developed world has probably tripled in volume, but inflation-adjusted manufacturing prices have fallen steadily, whereas the cost of prime knowledge products--health care and education--has tripled, again adjusted for inflation. The relative purchasing power of manufactured goods against knowledge products is now only one-fifth or one-sixth of what it was 50 years ago. Manufacturing employment in America has fallen from 35% of the workforce in the 1950s to less than half that now, without causing much social disruption. But it may be too much to hope for an equally easy transition in countries such as Japan or Germany, where blue-collar manufacturing workers still make up 25-30% of the labour force. The decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism The decline of farming as a producer of wealth and of livelihoods has allowed farm protectionism to spread to a degree that would have been unthinkable before the second world war. In the same way, the decline of manufacturing will trigger an explosion of manufacturing protectionism--even as lip service continues to be paid to free trade. This protectionism may not necessarily take the form of traditional tariffs, but of subsidies, quotas and regulations of all kinds. Even more likely, regional blocks will emerge that trade freely internally but are highly protectionist externally. The European Union, NAFTA and Mercosur already point in that direction. The future of the corporation Statistically, multinational companies play much the same part in the world economy as they did in 1913. But they have become very different animals. Multinationals in 1913 were domestic firms with subsidiaries abroad, each of them self-contained, in charge of a politically defined territory, and highly autonomous. Multinationals now tend to be organised globally along product or service lines. But like the multinationals of 1913, they are held together and controlled by ownership. By contrast, the multinationals of 2025 are likely to be held together and controlled by strategy. There will still be ownership, of course. But alliances, joint ventures, minority stakes, know-how agreements and contracts will increasingly be the building blocks of a confederation. This kind of organisation will need a new kind of top management. In most countries, and even in a good many large and complex companies, top management is still seen as an extension of operating management. Tomorrow's top management, however, is likely to be a distinct and separate organ: it will stand for the company. One of the most important jobs ahead for the top management of the big company of tomorrow, and especially of the multinational, will be to balance the conflicting demands on business being made by the need for both short-term and long-term results, and by the corporation's various constituencies: customers, shareholders (especially institutional investors and pension funds), knowledge employees and communities. Against that background, this survey will seek to answer two questions: what can and should managements do now to be ready for the next society? And what other big changes may lie ahead of which we are as yet unaware? * Peter Drucker is a writer, teacher and consultant who has published 32 books, mostly on various aspects of society, economics, politics and management. Born in 1909 in Vienna, Mr Drucker was educated in Austria and England, and holds a doctorate from Frankfurt University. Since 1971 he has been Professor of Social Science and Management at Claremont Graduate University, California. -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia/Secret War in Laos veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 32393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From allsop at extropy.org Sun Nov 27 17:34:36 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:34:36 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051127103235.01c343a0@mail.comcast.net> Marc Geddes commented: > (1) Qualia are a separate substance which can exist independently of the material world (substance dualism) > > (2) 'Qualia' is simply a misnomer - all that exists are physical processes (materialism) > > (3) 'Qualia' themselves are not physical, but they are entirely *caused by* and *dependent on* physical > processes (non-reductive physicalism) > > (1) Seems to have been largely ruled out by modern science but options (2) and (3) are still very much > alive. Daniel Dennett would be an example of someone who champions (2), David Chalmers an example > of someone who champions (3). I think you should restate (2) to instead say: ?all that exists are causal physical processes. (causal being all that can be observed through cause and effect detection.) Then you can add a (4) which includes my theory that qualia are physical processes. Like causal physical properties, qualia are also physical. They are just more than simply causal ? i.e. there is something they are phenomenally ?like? which is ineffable to traditional cause and effect observation. Also, If you say qualia are *caused by* and *dependent on* how is it not a ?physical process1 or how is it different than a physical process?? Brent Allsop From allsop at extropy.org Sun Nov 27 17:49:14 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:49:14 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051124081330.GN2249@leitl.org> <22360fa10511240720h6cd26c90vfc7626274c5388de@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511240856r35831e10m31de0b1650e01765@mail.gmail.com> <22360fa10511241037i5c172ab3gc1789b6b20c95a1b@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0511241529u5444f783q@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051127104539.01cbfc00@mail.comcast.net> At 05:46 PM 11/24/2005, gts wrote: >On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:29:12 -0500, Emlyn wrote: > >>But given the shakiness of the concept when examined in detail, and the >>basic fact that the human brain seems to be architected on the basis >>of bullshitting itself at every possible turn, I view that subjective >>experience with suspicion, to put it mildly. > >Yet you acknowlege the experience. That experience *is* qualia, no matter >how we choose to think about it. > >If the human brain is a machine then it should be possible to build a >machine that experiences qualia. Some would say this is the essence of >strong AI. This is what Brent envisions also. The question is how do we >build that machine. I think it would be helpful if we understood what the >hell we're talking about when we talk about qualia. :) > >Whatever it is, it's staring us right in the face. Absolutely! Unlike the usage of "god" to explain something we don't understand or can't yet experience - we all experience qualia every day. What red and green are like is staring every one of us in the face. It should be blatantly obvious that purely causal observation is not enough to explain or detect what red and green are like. Brent Allsop From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 27 18:00:03 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:00:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com><00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> "Technotranscendence" > Einstein had pants, hair, respiration, a degree, and the ability to speak > German -- all things rocks lack. If you SINCERELY thought that the ability wear pants was what I meant by intelligence then yes, that does tell me a lot about intelligence, not about Einstein's intelligence but about somebody's. > Eventually, you're going to have to do a little better than just > list examples I don't see why. > and you'll have the "moral equivalent" of a definition. Most people don't have a dictionary in their house and haven't even looked at one since their fourth grade teacher made them, and if asked to explain something they would most likely point to something else and say "like that". If you held their feet to the fire and insisted on a definition of just about anything the result would be so full of holes as to be almost laughable; and yet these people could pass the Turing Test with flying colors, and many of them you would personally admire for their considerable brainpower. I believe that is one reason early AI programs were so brittle and unsatisfactory, they were based not on examples but on a long list of rigid rules and definitions. And by the way, where do think the dictionary makers got the information to write their definitions? John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 18:13:17 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:13:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:00:03 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > If you SINCERELY thought that the ability wear pants was what I meant by > intelligence then yes, that does tell me a lot about intelligence, not > about Einstein's intelligence but about somebody's. Seems to me you are defining "intelligence" as something similar or identical to "creativity", and that perhaps you should make the distinction. Creativity requires some ability to reflect on and ponder one's experience, something lower organisms lack but which Einstein-like organisms do not lack. I would say that a bacterium acts intelligently or rationally, but not creatively, when it swims away from vinegar. It lacks self-awareness and the ability to ponder its experience, but nevetheless has a basic low-level machine intelligence hardwired in its genes. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Sun Nov 27 18:34:26 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 11:34:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <7a5e56060511250148m550f4d93qe88dec25bfafa70e@mail.gmail.co m> References: <7a5e56060511250148m550f4d93qe88dec25bfafa70e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051127105629.01cd9d60@mail.comcast.net> At 02:48 AM 11/25/2005, Marc Geddes wrote: >it is still an open question whether qualia are illusions (i.e they >are really material processes) or whether qualia have a reality over >and above the physical processes which gave rise to them. This is a stupid thing to say. Daniel Dennett made the same stupid mistake when he said: "we don't have qulia - it only seems we do" in "Consciousness explained." An "illusion" is information that doesn't accurately represent its referent. When we look at the pencil in a glass of water, it appears bent to us because water refracts the light resulting in our conscious knowledge being bent or not like the real pencil which is not bent. But this doesn't change the reality of our "bent" knowledge and what it is really like. When we are talking about qualia or phenomenal properties we are talking about the final representation and their natures - not whether these representation are mistakenly not like themselves or something. Our knowledge of the pencil is really bent - this is the seeming. But what we are asking is - what is the nature of this bent pencil that is our conscious knowledge. The fact that it is different from the real pencil has nothing to do with this conversation? To say a quale is an illusion and hence do not exist is to say we have a qualia or our knowledge, that doesn't accurately represent something (what?). This is absurd because it is the phenomenal property itself and its qualities that we are talking about in the first place. We are not talking about whether these phenomenal properties improperly represent something else. Though an illusion is conscious knowledge that doesn't accurately represent something - it is still very real and like what it is like. And what this very real knowledge is like is what we are talking about here. Conscious knowledge is what it is - it can't be an "illusion". Even if a quale was an illusion - we would be talking about whatever it is that is this incorrect "seeming" - not the fact that it was - if it only some how could be - incorrect. Brent Allsop From amara at amara.com Sun Nov 27 18:36:02 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 19:36:02 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Woohoo! A precious piece of asteroid in Hayabusa's hand Message-ID: Wow! Congratulations to JAXA!! Hayabusa succeeded on its second try to *touch down for a few seconds* (!) with its giant scooper and scoop material from the asteroid surface... But we won't know until June 2007 what the scooper contains.... Amara ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Japanese Spacecraft to Start Journey Home http://www.newsday.com/news/science/wire/sns-ap-japan-asteroid,0,612095.story?coll=sns-ap-science-headlines By HIROKO TABUCHI Associated Press Writer November 27, 2005, 11:59 AM EST TOKYO -- A Japanese spacecraft on an unprecedented mission to bring asteroid material back to Earth is set to start home despite showing signs of trouble earlier, an executive of Japan's space agency, JAXA, said Sunday. On Saturday, the Hayabusa probe apparently landed on the Itokawa asteroid and collected surface samples. After the landing, the probe hovered about three miles from the asteroid and appeared to be shaking due to a possible gas leak from a thruster, JAXA said. The probe shut down all its engines Saturday and switched to solar power while JAXA investigated the problem. But the probe appears to be stabilizing, and JAXA plans to re-ignite its engines by Dec. 10 for the return journey, JAXA executive Yasunori Matogawa said. "We will meet that deadline, whatever happens," Matogawa said. Otherwise, it would be two more years before the probe -- orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars together with the asteroid -- would be in the right position to return, he said. JAXA said the Hayabusa appeared to have touched down for a few seconds on the asteroid about 180 million miles from Earth, collecting powder from its surface and then lifting off again to transmit data to mission controllers. But the agency will not know for sure if Hayabusa collected surface samples until it returns to Earth. It is expected to land in Australia's Outback in June 2007, more than four years after its launch in May 2003. If all goes well, it will be the first time a probe returns to Earth with samples from an asteroid, according to JAXA. A NASA probe collected data for two weeks from the asteroid Eros in 2001, but it did not return to Earth. The landing on the asteroid was Hayabusa's second, following a faulty touchdown earlier this month. JAXA lost contact with the probe during that attempt and did not even realize it had landed until days later -- long after it had lifted off. Scientists hope examining asteroid samples will help unlock the secrets of how celestial bodies formed. Asteroid surfaces are believed to have remained relatively unchanged over the eons, unlike larger bodies such as planets and moons. On top of recovering samples from the asteroid, the probe also is testing a new type of ion engine that uses an electric field to accelerate positive ions to a high velocity. JAXA hopes to use the fuel-saving technology in missions farther into space, its Web site said. The Hayabusa mission is part of Japan's efforts to expand its space exploration program. Earlier this year, JAXA said it would send its first astronauts into space and set up a base on the moon by 2025. -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "Space travel is utter bilge." ---Richard van der Riet Woolley [Astronomer Royal 1956--71] From jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 27 18:43:48 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:43:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com><00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer><008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion><00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > Seems to me you are defining "intelligence" as [....] I am not defining intelligence PERIOD. However I am perfectly willing to point to things I think are intelligent and I'll let you work out what I must mean. I've been using that general method to communicate since I was an infant and first had the use of language and it still works pretty damn well. > I would say that a bacterium acts intelligently or rationally Contrast is needed to see things, if EVERYTHING has a property then it's invisible and there is no point in wasting perfectly good ASCII strings like "intelligence" and "rationality" on it. John K Clark From allsop at extropy.org Sun Nov 27 18:47:52 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 11:47:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.0.20051127114050.01cc6bd0@mail.comcast.net> At 05:15 AM 11/26/2005, gts wrote: >On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 16:34 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > >>We might value such a [qualia] gene a great deal but to Natural >>Selection it's useless, in fact to Natural >>Selection it's invisible. > >Why useless and invisible? Presumably animals run from forest fires >because they smell, hear, see, or feel them. All qualia. > >-gts But we can also program "zombie" machines to do the same thing. The difference is - they wouldn't do it as efficiently. Qualia are a very powerful and intelligent way to represent diverse kinds of information. Some things we really have a hard time representing with mere abstract programming or mere numbers. Motivation is another thing that is very difficult (though not impossible) to program - yet something that qualia accomplishes naturally and simply. Nature obviously has phenomenal properties - why wouldn't evolution discover and utilize these powerful tools to make us more intelligent and motivated - and hence more survivable? Brent Allsop From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 18:51:36 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:51:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:43:48 -0500, John K Clark wrote: >> I would say that a bacterium acts intelligently or rationally > > Contrast is needed to see things, if EVERYTHING has a property then it's > invisible and there is no point in wasting perfectly good ASCII strings > like"intelligence" and "rationality" on it. I'm not suggesting everything is intelligent. I am suggesting that the most basic level of awareness is a simple physical change in response to the environment; that evolution produced organisms with evolved nervous systems not to *create* awareness, but rather to *exploit* it. And yes I agree that in some sense the word "awareness" becomes meaningless if everything is aware. But we need to use words to communicate our meanings. When you see that awareness is a meaningless word then you will have understood my argument. -gts From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 19:05:57 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 19:05:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/27/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > > Nonetheless, I saw a message about sending private posts to the list. > Sometimes this is done unwittingly. But please be careful not to send > private emails to the list. > > I have done so accidentally in the past. If someone sends an email only reply to someone here perhaps they ought to mark it PRIVATE or similar. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 19:03:28 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 14:03:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20051127114050.01cc6bd0@mail.comcast.net> References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer> <1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <6.2.3.4.0.20051127114050.01cc6bd0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:47:52 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > Nature obviously has phenomenal properties - why wouldn't evolution > discover and utilize these powerful tools to make us more intelligent > and motivated - and hence more survivable? Yes, this is what I'm also saying. This is what I mean by pan-psychism. The world is not divided between aware things and unaware things. It is divided between things that have tools for using awareness, and those that don't. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 20:43:51 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:43:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: "The Avantguardian" > if the two phenomena were 100% correlated, one would have to > admit that a bacterium was a tiny bit conscious. I think it would make more sense to say the bacterium is a tiny bit "aware," and reserve the word "consciousness" to mean something like "awareness of one's awareness". Consciousness probably requires an advanced nervous system. Humans seem conscious, but not bacteria and probably not even much more complex organisms like insects. On a slightly different subject, you mentioned you're a biologist. Eventually someone is going to use nanotechnology or genetic engineering, or a combination of both, to build an "artificial" bacterium functionally identical in every respect to a "real" bacterium, perhaps even with the ability to replicate and even mutate (gasp). Will that artificial bacterium be "alive" in your opinion? I would answer yes. The bacterium is not artificial -- the definition of life is artificial. The entire world is alive, or dead, whichever word you prefer. Personally I'm strongly biased toward the former. :) Is this consistent with your idea of pan-vitalism as the source of what we normally mean by biological life? If so then we may be talking about the same thing. -gts From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 27 20:46:51 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:46:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511272047.jARKl0e05147@tick.javien.com> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails ...If someone sends an email only reply to someone here perhaps they ought to mark it PRIVATE or similar. Dirk Or one can write in all lower case when responding offlist. One can still figure out what the person is saying with little loss of readability, and it serves as a constant reminder at the start of every sentence that the post was intended as an offlist private conversation. I noticed a former exi poster recently quoted one of my offlist comments, with all lower case still intact. {8^| Harmless in that case, but annoying still. spike From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sun Nov 27 23:00:25 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:30:25 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511271500i1e8516fei@mail.gmail.com> On 28/11/05, gts wrote: > It may be no coincidence that small children intuit pan-psychism. They > talk to what we consider inert objects. Children are naive to think inert > objects can understand words and respond, but perhaps their basic > intuition is correct. > > -gts > Or, our brains might have evolved primarily to cope with complex social networks composed of other humans, and so we have a model of other which goes rampant and attributes "like-me" to dollies and cars and Talking Eliza software. And attributes the making of the whole world to something "like-me", ie: God. What you are proposing is a sort of strong-dualism, which interestingly sits very comfortably with strong materialism. Materialism says "there cannot be consciousness, so you can disregard it and play on". Strong dualism says "there must always be consciousness, so you can disregard it and play on". Any disagreements are about angels dancing on a pin. In practice, they appear to be wholly compatible. In contrast, it's the view that there is something to consciousness, something special that we'd have to discover and do to imbue our mind-children with subjective experience, that is at odds with these views. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 41000 (http://nanowrimo.org) From nanogirl at halcyon.com Mon Nov 28 02:21:47 2005 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 18:21:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails References: <20051116062153.37874.qmail@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20051126182118.02fc7e80@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <00a901c5f3c2$87ee6600$0200a8c0@Nano> You have my most sincere sympathies Natasha, and if you need anything you know where I am. Hugs, G` 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 Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." ----- Original Message ----- From: Natasha Vita-More To: ExI chat list Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:32 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Private Emails Due to the death of my beloved brother, I have been a little out of communication recently. I did had a good laugh the other day, thanks to Damien's post. Otherwise, I'm just lurking. Nonetheless, I saw a message about sending private posts to the list. Sometimes this is done unwittingly. But please be careful not to send private emails to the list. Thx - Natasha Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 08:00:00 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:00:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> --- gts wrote: > I think it would make more sense to say the > bacterium is a tiny bit > "aware," and reserve the word "consciousness" to > mean something like > "awareness of one's awareness". Consciousness > probably requires an > advanced nervous system. That's fair. Bacteria are aware. What is suprising is exactly how aware they are. New research is discovering that there are complex networks of response regulator genes in bacteria that allow them to make surprisingly complex decisions in real time. These genes allow them to sense a great number of enviromental cues and react accordingly as if they had brains. Please see this link to the results of a 2003 conference on bacterial neural networks that detail their complex behavior. http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v4/n1/full/embor702.html > > Humans seem conscious, but not bacteria and probably > not even much more > complex organisms like insects. If you call consciousness "awareness of one's awareness" then I suppose so. However keep in mind that even simple creatures like bacteria and insects are aware of the world in ways that we, without technology, are not. For example there are bacteria with built in compasses that can sense the magnetic field of the earth and bees can see the UV spectrum. Thus they are probably more aware then we give them credit for. > > On a slightly different subject, you mentioned > you're a biologist. > Eventually someone is going to use nanotechnology or > genetic engineering, > or a combination of both, to build an "artificial" > bacterium functionally > identical in every respect to a "real" bacterium, > perhaps even with the > ability to replicate and even mutate (gasp). Will > that artificial > bacterium be "alive" in your opinion? Perhaps. Please read the link above to get an understanding of how technologically challenging it will be to build an artificial bacterium that has anywhere near the functionality of the real thing. If the artificial bacterium is "aware" of its environment in addition to being able to reproduce and mutate, then yes it will be alive. Of course, even if it can't immediately sense its environment but can eventually evolve to do so by mutation and selection, then it may still qualify. > I would answer yes. The bacterium is not artificial > -- the definition of > life is artificial. The entire world is alive, or > dead, whichever word you > prefer. Personally I'm strongly biased toward the > former. :) > > Is this consistent with your idea of pan-vitalism as > the source of what we > normally mean by biological life? If so then we may > be talking about the > same thing. Yes. Because evolution does a beautiful job explaining the diversity of life yet can do little more than hand waving when it comes to explaining where the very first life came from. Yes, I suppose that sheer coincidence operating over billions of years, might have allowed a self-replicating RNA molecule to come into being, but the world is a harsh place. The chances of that unique hypothesized sequence of RNA remaining stable enough replicate in sufficient numbers to give natural selection enough time to shape into all the variety of life we have is unlikely. Keep in mind that natural selection operates largely through negative feed-back mechanism, that is it erases the non-fit and thereby allows the fit to propagate. Because of this, you need a lot of whatever is being selected for in order for natural selection to operate. Why would natural selection "go easy" on newly sunthesized slip shod RNA molecule for long enough for it to achieve a huge population before "tightening the screws" so to speak to allow for natural selection? A single molecular sequence or organism without peers cannot evolve by natural selection, it can only live or die. Only populations can evolve. Furthermore despite having the technology to manipulate RNA for over 50 years, we have not been able to duplicate or even guess at the sequence of this magic self-replicating RNA that lies at the heart of current biogenesis theories. I don't think any such sequence will ever be found. The biological molecules of life (DNA, RNA, proteins, sugars, and lipids)are way too interdependent on one another for any one of these molecules to take the title of "first born". It really is like a molecular "chicken or egg" problem. Because of these inconsistencies in current biogenesis theories, as well as anthropic arguments in physics, I feel the only explanation that is consistent with all we know is pan- vitalism. That is the hypothesis that at some point in the distant past, the fine structure constant of the universe was slightly different than it is today. Furthermore the universe was smaller and contained far less entropy. Thus the universe was more organized than it was today and more inter-connected. I suppose it was just after the death of the first generation hydrogen supergiant stars that synthesized the first middle-weight atomic nuclei that are the constituents of life (carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and phosphorus) but before the heavy and transition metal nuclei (iron, tin, lead, etc) were created. During this early period of low entropy, the universe was warmer, wetter, and more organized. Thus the whole universe at that time might have served as the "primordial soup". Life might have popped into existense everywhere spontaneously because the thermodynamic conditions favored it in a way that it does not today. In short, I think there was a period in the history of the universe when the whole universe was indeed alive ergo pan-vitalism. Then as time progressed, the universe expanded, the fine structure constant changed, heavy nuclei and eventually black holes formed, and the universe became the cold inhospitable entropic place that it is today. Whole swaths of the universe "died" and all that is alive today are the remnants of the once living universe, now strewn across the galaxies in little nooks and crannies where the conditions are amicable to it. This remnant life travels from world to world by pan-spermia and perhaps for those organisms fortunate enough to survive their own intelligence technology. I feel my hypothesis is superior to that of Watson's RNA world in that it does not require that life charge up a thermodynamic hill out of nothingness to overrun the earth. Instead, the entire living universe slid down a thermodynamic hill until the earth was one of the few places where it was able to make a stand against the void. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 12:16:57 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:16:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out In-Reply-To: References: <20051125212028.32169.qmail@web81607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/26/05, Anna Tylor wrote: > > Dear Mr. Tymes > > > My question: In June I did something I have never done before, a > drug. It > was a very > overwhelming fantastic experience for I thought of things never in my > wildest dreams could > I have imagined. > Could this drug have caused this effect? Am I experiencing this addiction > based upon the > memory from that day? > A lot of people experience this when taking a psychedelic for the first time. It expands awareness and also shows a lot of the things the subconscious normally does not present to the conscious mind. This includes insights and connections on varying scales from the trivial to the cosmic. Mostly they are 'wrong', although not always, and it is quite hard to tell which is which initially. It depends on the experience of the user and their mental discipline. The behaviour you have explained might be obsessive due to its interest and the fact that the drug has literally opened up an new aspect of the world to you. Psychedelics are, in general, not addictive either mentally or physically. However, they can, and often do, result in profound changes of ones worldview. My suggestion is to keep doing what interests you, and sometime, when you 'run out of steam' go back and take the drug again. However, this time prepare yourself for it by outlining a purpose. It still probably won't do much good, but you may well start to focus the experience to some extent, especially in the downward phase. BTW, not sure what you took, but LSD is probably the most powerful. If you got your experience from something like ketamine, salvia or mushrooms then LSD will *really* open your eyes. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 28 13:03:11 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:03:11 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. Message-ID: The Avantguardian avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com >I suppose it was just after the death of the first >generation hydrogen supergiant stars that synthesized >the first middle-weight atomic nuclei that are the >constituents of life (carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, >sulfur, and phosphorus) but before the heavy and >transition metal nuclei (iron, tin, lead, etc) were >created. Maybe not.. here is some Spitzer data that hint that the first stars were very big, very hot, and because of their mass, would have been very short-lived (you forgot the lifetime of these first stars in your hypothesis). If the interpretation on these data are correct, then these stars will have no trouble producing the heavy elements via the r or s processes of nucleosynthesis (*) quickly. PhysicsWeb news item http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/11/2/1 BBC News item http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4400672.stm Phil Plait's blog discussion of this discovery http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/?p=206 Amara (*) http://ultraman.ssl.berkeley.edu/nucleosynthesis.html -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 13:19:13 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 13:19:13 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/26/05, gts wrote: > > Religion/God/Mysticism/Cartesian-Dualism is one answer to the question of > qualia, but one that most extropians and transhumanists would probably > prefer to reject. The need for divine intervention would make the > extropian dream of strong AI enormously more difficult and intimidating. > How would we persuade or force God to inject souls into our machines? > > One minor point. I would claim that mysticism, or at least the experience of the mystical, is itself a quale. Albeit one that most people do not experience, and certainly not often. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 14:28:22 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:28:22 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 11/27/05, gts wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:43:48 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > >> I would say that a bacterium acts intelligently or rationally > > > > Contrast is needed to see things, if EVERYTHING has a property then it's > > invisible and there is no point in wasting perfectly good ASCII strings > > like"intelligence" and "rationality" on it. > > I'm not suggesting everything is intelligent. > > I am suggesting that the most basic level of awareness is a simple > physical change in response to the environment; that evolution produced > organisms with evolved nervous systems not to *create* awareness, but > rather to *exploit* it. > > And yes I agree that in some sense the word "awareness" becomes > meaningless if everything is aware. But we need to use words to > communicate our meanings. When you see that awareness is a meaningless > word then you will have understood my argument. > > Intelligence, awareness, consciousness and qualia *may* be connected via information processing but there are significant differences between the meanings of each word. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Mon Nov 28 03:41:36 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 22:41:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> Pardon me for entering this conversation late. I've been mulling. On 11/23/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: > > But how will you know if your theory is correct, how do you test it? > >You guys must not be listing to what I am saying either that or be very >unclear on the concept of what I am trying to say. Why do you keep saying >this? The proof is in the effing! The ultimate absolute proof will >eventually come when we join our minds together into grand unified conscious >worlds (spirit worlds if you will) made of shared phenomenal properties. > >Right now, when I hug my wife, I am only aware of half of the phenomenal >sensations. I only know what it is "like" for me. My prediction is that >once we can eff, and so on, we will eventually be able to engineer ways to >join our minds together (similare to the way our left and right hemisphere >are joined) so that in addition to being aware of what I am feeling, I will >also be aware of what she is feeling. Why is this such a difficult thing >for people to grasp? If anything like this happens, this will prove that >qualia exist since we will be engineering systems that use qualia to >represent information like our brain does and manipulating the qualia in our >own minds. After reading this, how can someone ask: "how do you test it?" But how will you know *that* you are effing? Say we find some weird particle that interacts with brains and correlates with states of awareness. Say with the help of such particles we let you and your wife mix up your minds, so that your brain gets input directly from her brain. How will you know this isn't just some fancy hookup to her brain-as-computer that allows you to treat her as a video game? How will you know you are accessing her qualia? Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From rhanson at gmu.edu Mon Nov 28 03:48:46 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 22:48:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127224421.02e4ef68@gmu.edu> On 11/23/2005, John Clark wrote: >>Someone will realize there must be phenomenal properties >>in nature in addition to causal properties. > >If qualia is non causal that would explain why the Turing Test can't detect >it, but now we have a much more serious problem, natural selection can't >detect it either. If qualia is not an inevitable byproduct of intelligence >as I believe then why did evolution invent the thing? It will not be of one >bit of help getting a gene into the next generation. Oh it is much worse than that. If qualia are properties that do not sit in the network of causation for brain states, then qualia cannot be the reason that anyone claims that they have qualia! The fact that qualia exist and that people argue for qualia existing could only be a coincidence. People would say they had qualia even if qualia did not exist. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 14:57:04 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:57:04 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/28/05, The Avantguardian wrote: > > > > Yes. Because evolution does a beautiful job > explaining the diversity of life yet can do little > more than hand waving when it comes to explaining > where the very first life came from. Yes, I suppose > that sheer coincidence operating over billions of > years, might have allowed a self-replicating RNA > molecule to come into being, but the world is a harsh > place. The chances of that unique hypothesized > sequence of RNA remaining stable enough replicate in > sufficient numbers to give natural selection enough > time to shape into all the variety of life we have is > unlikely. Keep in mind that natural selection operates > MWI of QM coupled with the Anthropic Principle can probably account for that. In fact, it may be good evidence for the truth of MWI. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 15:30:45 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:30:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:28:22 -0500, Dirk Bruere wrote: > Intelligence, awareness, consciousness and qualia *may* be connected via > information processing but there are significant differences between the > meanings of each word. Here is how I would like to define them: Awareness: The capacity to be affected by the environment. Everything is aware, but only higher organisms know they are aware. Qualia: The experience(s) of being aware. Qualia are the answer to the question "What is it like to experience X?" e.g, what is it like to be a bat? Lower organisms experience qualia but don't reflect on their experience. Higher organisms do reflect on experience, and ask questions like "What are qualia?" Consciousness: The capacity to reflect on experience, to be aware of one's awareness. A defining characteristic of higher organisms. Probably requires an advanced nervous system and a concept of self. Intelligence: The ability to respond to experience in a manner that promotes survival. Does not require consciousness. Bacteria and even viruses are intelligent. One might ask seemingly absurd questions like, "What is it like to be molecule of phosphorus?" (I can already hear Eugen and Damien scoffing) but this question is no less absurd than the much more reasonable question "What is it like to be an insect?" Neither molecules nor (presumably) insects have the ability to reflect on experience (neither have consciousness) but it seems reasonable to me that insects nevertheless *have* experience. They have eyes, presumably to see, but as I define consciousness they are probably no more conscious than a single molecule. If insects see and experience their environment, and are fundamentally no different from less complex structures like bacteria and viruses and single molecules, then we are forced to conclude that everything is aware. An important point is that consciousness is *not* in my view a so-called "emergent property" of matter. There is nothing new about consciousness, except in so much as it is more highly evolved. Consciousness is nothing more than aware matter becoming aware of itself. Evolution produced consciousness as a way to exploit the fundamental awareness of all matter. Consciousness may even be an inevitable consequence of evolution. -gts From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 28 15:47:09 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 07:47:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] private emails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511281547.jASFl2e02507@tick.javien.com> anna wrote: >This is a very private matter for me and I wasn't aware that either Adrien >Tymes or Yudkowsky where making my e-mails public Anna, YOU forwarded your messages to the whole world. Not Eli, not Adrian, YOU did it, when you replied to a chat group message. You still owe Eliezer an apology. spike From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 16:00:58 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:00:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: An atom of phosphorus, I meant, not a molecule. :) Speaking of atoms, the man credited with giving us the idea said: "by convention sweet and by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color; but in reality atoms and void." -Democritus This leads me to wonder if qualia are also stress responses. We feel "hot" or "cold" as a response to temperature stress. Perhaps colors are shades of light stress. Green and blue feel "cool and pleasant" to me. Yellow and red feel "hot and alarming". Brown feels "barren". Perhaps this is because my ancient ancestors were happiest in plush green forests in good blue-sky weather, and because fire and intense heat and sunlight were dangerous. The green-yellow-red colors used for traffic signals make perfect sense. -gts From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 28 16:15:10 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:15:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511231824.jANINuvN005192@ra.pacificwebworks.com><000c01c5f0c2$866a6b10$8d074e0c@MyComputer><6.2.1.2.0.20051124010334.01d6b490@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000e01c5f13e$feeb5870$be0a4e0c@MyComputer><1132900053.22324.164.camel@alito.homeip.net> <6.2.3.4.0.20051127114050.01cc6bd0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <003701c5f436$f8f7fc20$02084e0c@MyComputer> "Brent Allsop" > But we can also program "zombie" machines > to do the same thing. I'm curious, what makes you so certain that these machines are zombies? I have my own reasons for thinking so, they don't act like they are conscious, but you think that reason is "stupid". > Motivation is another thing that is very difficult (though not impossible) > to program Motivation is easy, it's easy to make a computer want to do something and we've been doing it since the old vacuum tube ENIAC days. The trick if to figure out what the computer should want to do. > why wouldn't evolution discover and utilize these powerful tools to make > us more intelligent and motivated - and hence more survivable? It would. If qualia effected our behavior and made us more survivable as you said then I can't think of any reason in the world Evolution wouldn't come up with it; and for exactly precisely the same reason I can't think of any reason in the world why the Turing Test won't work and is "stupid". John K Clark From robert.bradbury at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 17:08:59 2005 From: robert.bradbury at gmail.com (Robert Bradbury) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:08:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Adding to Amara's comment... Since we are detecting supernova's out to 10+ billion light years, it is clear that the heavier elements synthesized through the r&s-processes that Amara points out have been around in the Universe for quite some time (probably 2+ times the age of our solar system). The creation of elements heavier than iron through the r(rapid)-process comes from stars which go supernova while the evolution of those elements derived from the s(slow)-process takes place in lower mass (< 8 M_sun) stars. But the lower mass stars which are quite abundant today are going to take some time (billions of years) to build up large quantities of s-process elements. Most stars which we see *are* evolving relatively large quantities of C/N/O as they are essential elements in the natural fusion processes that take place in stars. Of course these are only distributed into the galaxy to seed other stars/solar systems late in stellar lifetimes when they go through red-giant or nova/supernova phases. So C/N/O as well as heavier elements largely came from stars similar to or heavier than our sun in mass which "died" billions of years ago. The discussions which are interesting are what are the minimal element abundances necessary on planets for life to evolve. I'll always toss into the mix that it seems that evolution (nature) is clever enough to work around most constraints with respect to element abundances so long as there is carbon around and you have temperatures which can allow the formation of complex carbon based structures. Worth noting is that carbon is one of the more abundant elements in the universe (after you discard H & He). Robert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 17:46:09 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:46:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051128080000.36593.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 03:00:00 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > That's fair. Bacteria are aware. What is suprising is > exactly how aware they are. New research is > discovering that there are complex networks of > response regulator genes... Very interesting! However I would rephrase that as "What is surprising is exactly how intelligent they are." They make very intelligent use of awareness, especially given that they are almost certainly not conscious. > Then as time progressed, the universe expanded, the > fine structure constant changed, heavy nuclei and > eventually black holes formed, and the universe became > the cold inhospitable entropic place that it is today. > Whole swaths of the universe "died" and all that is > alive today are the remnants of the once living > universe, now strewn across the galaxies in little > nooks and crannies where the conditions are amicable > to it. This remnant life travels from world to world > by pan-spermia and perhaps for those organisms > fortunate enough to survive their own intelligence > technology. Given the relatively young age of the earth, I think this means you think life on earth originated elsewhere. Alien microbes? Yikes. :) -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 28 19:12:58 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 13:12:58 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:30 AM 11/28/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >One might ask seemingly absurd questions like, "What is it like to be >molecule of phosphorus?" (I can already hear Eugen and Damien scoffing) That's an easy enough trick, but what is it like to hear a molecule of phosphorus scoffing? From reason at longevitymeme.org Mon Nov 28 19:21:36 2005 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:21:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: My graduate simulation work on Pop III stars, from formation to late life core ignition events, demonstrated that they had a significantly higher mass function, and much larger stars may be stable (up to 200-500 Msol). Consequently, the population burns much faster than Pop II. They explode much more readily too. Smaller Pop III stars are very long-lived, however; you'd expect to see them everywhere today if they existed in any significant number, with photospheric metallicities much the same as when they formed. Since we don't, this is another argument for the high mass function. You can build Pop II metallicities from scratch in n*10^6 years, where 1 < n < 100, depending on your mass function. Reason -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Robert Bradbury Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 9:09 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. Adding to Amara's comment... Since we are detecting supernova's out to 10+ billion light years, it is clear that the heavier elements synthesized through the r&s-processes that Amara points out have been around in the Universe for quite some time (probably 2+ times the age of our solar system). The creation of elements heavier than iron through the r(rapid)-process comes from stars which go supernova while the evolution of those elements derived from the s(slow)-process takes place in lower mass (< 8 M_sun) stars. But the lower mass stars which are quite abundant today are going to take some time (billions of years) to build up large quantities of s-process elements. Most stars which we see *are* evolving relatively large quantities of C/N/O as they are essential elements in the natural fusion processes that take place in stars. Of course these are only distributed into the galaxy to seed other stars/solar systems late in stellar lifetimes when they go through red-giant or nova/supernova phases. So C/N/O as well as heavier elements largely came from stars similar to or heavier than our sun in mass which "died" billions of years ago. The discussions which are interesting are what are the minimal element abundances necessary on planets for life to evolve. I'll always toss into the mix that it seems that evolution (nature) is clever enough to work around most constraints with respect to element abundances so long as there is carbon around and you have temperatures which can allow the formation of complex carbon based structures. Worth noting is that carbon is one of the more abundant elements in the universe (after you discard H & He). Robert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 19:24:40 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:24:40 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 08:19:13 -0500, Dirk Bruere wrote: > I would claim that mysticism, or at least the experience of the > mystical, is itself a quale. I believe mystical experiences are the direct awareness that pan-psychism is true. The world is aware. When we speak of biological life, we are referring to those parts of the world that have evolved the ability to use awareness in intelligent ways. The most intelligent parts of the world (us, as far as we know) are aware of our awareness. We are the world becoming self-aware. Pantheism and process theology are the theological cousins of pan-psychism. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 28 19:54:43 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:54:43 -0700 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Robin Hanson, > But how will you know *that* you are effing? Say we find some weird > particle > that interacts with brains and correlates with states of awareness. Say > with > the help of such particles we let you and your wife mix up your minds, so > that your brain gets input directly from her brain. How will you know > this > isn't just some fancy hookup to her brain-as-computer that allows you to > treat her as a video game? How will you know you are accessing her > qualia? You are right, strictly speaking, effing, alone will not let you know with absolute surety that you have the right phenomenal property in the destination mind. You are hypothesizing that qualia will correlate with "some weird particle" that we find. I am hypothesizing that it will be an additional to causal property of matter (particles?) we already causally know about which correlates to phenomenal properties. Whatever qualia turns out to be - the effing answers below will still be the same. With effing, some causal detector causally senses the corelate's causes (but not its phenomenal properties as this is impossible with abstracted representations) in the source brain. This data is then communicated to the destination brain via abstracted cause and effect communication. In the destination brain, this abstract information is then converted back into the correct real correlate which has (we will assume we know the right one to produce given the incoming abstract causal data) the same phenomenal properties in the other brain. Right now, people point out possibilities like we are a brain in a vat - or that other's are not phenomenally conscious like ourselves, solipsism... and so on. Everyone admits these possibilities - but no one gives these ideas any consideration other than a very remote possibility. Occam's Razor and assumptions about physical phenomenon being consistent are some of the many rational reasons for making these very rational and productive assumptions. When we discover these correlates we will understand much more than we do now, the natures, the whats and whys of them. Making these arguments - that we have things right as far as other minds and effing goes - all the more compelling. We will find that the causally detectable correlates will always be correlated with the same red in all minds. And I suspect our knowledge of these correlates will tell is rational reasons for why warm is different than red, is different than a sound - and so on. Again, giving us much more reason for confidence when we have things right. Beyond this kind of effing, I have also talked about grand unified spirit worlds full of shared spirits and claimed that this will be the ultimate proof that we do have these mappings between phenomenal properties and their correlates right. Because of its requirement of extreme brain redesigning and enhancing - these capabilities will of course come much latter than the simple effing I talked about above. This will work because everything in these unified worlds of consciousness will effectively be one conscious mind. Just as we are aware of a red quale in one hemisphere and a green quale in the other hemisphere of our brain at the same time, everything in these shared spirit worlds will be universally aware of it all. In other words, each of the spirits in these shared worlds will be aware of the same phenomenal property of the same neural correlate in the same grand mind. I guess I should explain what I mean by a "spirit". At the center of our conscious world is a phenomenal representation of our skull which represents our real skull with two window like holes that miss represent our eyes. Inside this knowledge of our skull, looking out these windows, is conscious knowledge of an "I" that is our knowledge of our self looking out these windows. Unlike our knowledge of our skull - this "spirit" has no referent in reality that it represents. But despite its lack of a referent, this knowledge of ourselves is still very real and in reality what we phenomenally (or spiritually if you will) are. When we have an "out of body" experience - it is this knowledge of this "I" or "spirit" that leaves our knowledge of our skull - all of which is in the conscious world produced by our brain. Surely in the future we will be able to architect interface system (similar to the corpus callosum which connects our brain hemispheres) allowing multiple spirit worlds to be unified into the same conscious world. Surely our spirits will be able to "travel" between these types of properly designed shared conscious worlds. When we are doing sophisticated things like this with qualia - it will be all but impossible to say we don't have the map between phenomenal properties and their correlated precisely right. For all practical purposes we will know with a surety - that we are really and accurately effing. Many people trouble about "uploading" - fearing the true "I" or spirit will be destroyed and will not survive through to its duplicate in another more capable mind machine. Such very real problems can easily be solved by having our spirits "move" to more capable shared spirit worlds through these types of methods. In fact I describe just such a process in my short (50 pages) Science fiction story "1229 Years after Titanic" which is available at http://home.comcast.net/~brent.allsop if anyone is interested. Brent Allsop P.S. Is no one interested in taking my bet? From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 20:04:13 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:04:13 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On 11/28/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > Robin Hanson, > > > But how will you know *that* you are effing? Say we find some weird > > particle > > that interacts with brains and correlates with states of awareness. Say > > with > > the help of such particles we let you and your wife mix up your minds, > so > > that your brain gets input directly from her brain. How will you know > > this > > isn't just some fancy hookup to her brain-as-computer that allows you to > > treat her as a video game? How will you know you are accessing her > > qualia? > > You are right, strictly speaking, effing, alone will not let you know with > absolute surety that you have the right phenomenal property in the > destination mind. > > You are hypothesizing that qualia will correlate with "some weird > particle" > that we find. I am hypothesizing that it will be an additional to causal > property of matter (particles?) we already causally know about which > correlates to phenomenal properties. Whatever qualia turns out to be - > the > effing answers below will still be the same. Direct interaction with the Platonic Realm posited by Penrose? Or a combination of such an idea with the All Universes Hypothesis by Tegmark. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 20:07:36 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:07:36 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/28/05, gts wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 08:19:13 -0500, Dirk Bruere > wrote: > > > I would claim that mysticism, or at least the experience of the > > mystical, is itself a quale. > > I believe mystical experiences are the direct awareness that pan-psychism > is true. The world is aware. > > When we speak of biological life, we are referring to those parts of the > world that have evolved the ability to use awareness in intelligent ways. > The most intelligent parts of the world (us, as far as we know) are aware > of our awareness. We are the world becoming self-aware. > > Pantheism and process theology are the theological cousins of > pan-psychism. > Even if that is true, it still leaves open the question of the communication between matter and intelligence such that qualia are appreciated. If every bit of information processed results in a speck of consciousness/qualia or whatever, what is the mechanism that 'sees' it and reports it to other? Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 20:16:56 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:16:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051127070349.43489.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:12:58 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > That's an easy enough trick, but what is it like to hear a molecule of > phosphorus scoffing? Something like watching a pig fly. :) Thinking about insects, probably they live entirely in the present, with no self-concept and zero recall of their qualia.... something like watching a movie frame by frame but always forgetting the previous frames. We can then ask the same question about even lower organisms like bacteria, which unlike flies have no obvious sense organs. My imagination does not stretch that far, but I note that the sense organs of the fly are made of the same basic building blocks that make bacteria, and that bacteria do sense their environments in more primitive ways. Like flies they don't realize that they can sense their environments, but it's a plain fact that they do. -gts From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Nov 28 20:48:47 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:48:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 28, 2005, at 5:19 AM, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/26/05, gts wrote: > Religion/God/Mysticism/Cartesian-Dualism is one answer to the > question of > qualia, but one that most extropians and transhumanists would probably > prefer to reject. The need for divine intervention would make the > extropian dream of strong AI enormously more difficult and > intimidating. > How would we persuade or force God to inject souls into our machines? > If God exists (a possible God and no, I don't believe it), then GOD is as SAI. Dualism as such does not require GOD to create "souls". OK. This topic is for sure off into the weeds. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 28 20:52:07 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 21:52:07 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20051128205207.GB2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 03:16:56PM -0500, gts wrote: > Thinking about insects, probably they live entirely in the present, with > no self-concept and zero recall of their qualia.... something like > watching a movie frame by frame but always forgetting the previous frames. You are wrong, again. It is nice if you spin all kinds of alternative reality models, but please don't sell them for the real thing to a gullible public. Your attempts at resurrecting animism in new clothing is duly noted, and rejected. Animals, even primitive animals, are different from rocks. There's further a fundamental difference between one transistor, and >10^9 transistors arranged in form of a computer. Your transistor can't play chess. Your computer can. There is really a difference between those two. > We can then ask the same question about even lower organisms like > bacteria, which unlike flies have no obvious sense organs. My imagination But of course bacteria have sense organs, and means of processing. I suggest you stop speculating on how things might have turned out if $deity didn't have a proboscis, and hit your local university library instead. Lots of yummy juicy knowledge nectar can be had there. > does not stretch that far, but I note that the sense organs of the fly are > made of the same basic building blocks that make bacteria, and that > bacteria do sense their environments in more primitive ways. Like flies > they don't realize that they can sense their environments, but it's a > plain fact that they do. You're either an elaborate troll, on on some really excellent drugs. Can I have some of whatever you've been smoking? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From sentience at pobox.com Mon Nov 28 20:55:59 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:55:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127224421.02e4ef68@gmu.edu> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.5.6.2.20051127224421.02e4ef68@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> Robin Hanson wrote: > > Oh it is much worse than that. If qualia are properties that do not sit in > the network of causation for brain states, then qualia cannot be the reason > that anyone claims that they have qualia! The fact that qualia exist and > that people argue for qualia existing could only be a coincidence. People > would say they had qualia even if qualia did not exist. I had been surprised and slightly worried by people who don't grasp this point. It took me a while to realize that many people simply haven't made the emotional connection between the word "causal" and their everyday concept of things that make other things happen. Sort of like people who repeat phrases like "religion is not a falsifiable hypothesis; it belongs to a separate magisterium" and then in the next breath pray for a friend's welfare. Or like people who say that free will isn't "physical", and then decide what to eat for breakfast. They haven't made the connection between highfalutin' words like "causal", "physical", "falsifiable" and the underlying notions of things that make other things happen, things that exist, and things they expect to happen. Of course people who try to invent a separate magisterium just end up inventing hypotheses about things that exist and make other things happen - no matter how often the speaker repeats phrases like "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium". -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 21:04:20 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:04:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <20051128205207.GB2249@leitl.org> References: <00c401c5f36b$0c9cf3b0$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <008f01c5f36c$9fedb360$ec893cd1@pavilion> <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051128205207.GB2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:52:07 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> Thinking about insects, probably they live entirely in the present, with >> no self-concept and zero recall of their qualia.... something like >> watching a movie frame by frame but always forgetting the previous >> frames. > > You are wrong, again. Only an insect could know I was wrong. -gts From eugen at leitl.org Mon Nov 28 21:30:39 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:30:39 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: References: <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051128205207.GB2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20051128213038.GK2249@leitl.org> On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 04:04:20PM -0500, gts wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:52:07 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > >>Thinking about insects, probably they live entirely in the present, with > >>no self-concept and zero recall of their qualia.... something like > >>watching a movie frame by frame but always forgetting the previous > >>frames. > > > >You are wrong, again. > > Only an insect could know I was wrong. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=insect+long-term+memory&btnG=Google+Search Please stop posting until you've done your homework. You're giving the list a bad name. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 21:35:44 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:35:44 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Belated remarks on the usefulness of medicine In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20051015222046.01ed8490@mail.gmu.edu> References: <7641ddc60510082001y511b1087i95afa98e8c3734c8@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051010094432.02ee5c50@mail.gmu.edu> <7641ddc60510112249j76519144taa44fcfe7f976d65@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051012203144.02ec23f0@mail.gmu.edu> <7641ddc60510122020t22d7d964t47a0a3479997e292@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051013061708.02e9afa8@mail.gmu.edu> <7641ddc60510151845t5d4fef29r9a98fcf334ba25b3@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20051015222046.01ed8490@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511281335n4193c0f3i9f363e7049a9bfdd@mail.gmail.com> Again I answer belatedly, for which I am sorry. If you don't mind, I am sending this response to the ExI list. Posts extolling the virtues of North Korea and government mind control distract me too much, so I unsubscribed from wta-talk. On 10/15/05, Robin Hanson wrote: > > > You are doctor, so you must choose how to invest your riches. And > that choice implies an opinion about the quality of advisor studies. > Do you invest in an actively managed investment fund, or in an index > (passive) fund? ### I don't have riches, I work for a biotech company with no money but what little I have is in the following investments: two stocks which I chose based on my personal knowledge of facts which are not public knowledge (one is very successful, and I still have hope about the other), a mid-cap index fund, another index fund, a commodity fund (bought by my wife) which I intend to convert to index in January, and about 200$ in two managed funds which have consistently beaten the relevant benchmarks for the last 15 years or so. I also happen to be able to discern the lack of differences between the 15-year yields of most managed funds versus index funds, and I am superficially familiar with the efficient markets theory, and with the work of Fisher Black (second-hand of course), so I have the theoretical background and the simple observations sufficient to reject exaggerated claims of some advisers. Now, back to our healthcare discussion: >A comment about my "giving the benefit of the doubt to docs" - I > >don't give the benefit of the doubt to docs. If there are > >complicating factors that might make me doubt a specific claim, I > >doubt it. If there are no complicating factors, I trust the specific > claim. > > For *every* clinical study there is the possibility of these > complicating factors: fraud, missing regression factors, regression > selection biases, publication selection biases, side-effect induced > placebo effects, and differences between trial and typical treatment > practices. For every study you must make an estimate of the sign and > magnitude of these factors in order to use the study to estimate how > your patients may fare under the studied treatment. (In addition > there is the crucial issue of the average effect of treatments for > which there are no studies.) ### Fraud could be used to explain anything but do you think it is sufficient to explain away e.g. the reports of the effectiveness of kidney dialysis? Regression and selection biases do not affect RCT's, which should also take care of missing regression factors. If the side-effect induced placebo effect was a major force, then similar medications with more side-effects would be found consistently more effective than the ones without such side-effects - this is not the case in the comparisons of e.g. COX-2 inhibitors with non-specific COX inhibitors, or tricyclics with SRIs', and many others. Publication bias may account for failure to publish studies showing lack of effectiveness of existing treatments but it is quite unlikely to hide deleterious effects of accepted treatments. There are large rewards for publishing studies pointing out dangerous side effects. The only form of confounding factor you mentioned that could have a large effect on average efficacy of medicine is the difference between trial and typical practice, although again, the difference could mostly lead to lack of effect rather than deleterious effects, at least in non-interventional specialties. Most physicians tend to do less than necessary to treat, although they frequently overdo diagnostics. To summarize, confounding factors are mostly taken care of by correct trial design, and multiple independent trials, sufficient to arrive at conclusions which I on average tend to trust. The totality of these predominantly interventional trials is at variance with the observational studies of aggregate efficacy of healthcare spending on which you are building your position. Since the observational trials are subject to significantly larger uncertainties, and there are few of them, I have no difficulty choosing the the group to believe. -------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that unless you have specific evidence suggesting such a > problem is present, you assume the study has no such problem. That > is what I meant by giving them the benefit of the doubt. ### Since I dismiss biases as not anywhere close to be a reason to doubt medical efficacy studies in general and RCTs in particular (which is different from studies of financial advisers, as analyzed above), indeed I do not doubt them unless I have specific reason to distrust them. Now, you seem to be in the opposite situation - you believe you do have an a priori reason (i.e. the Rand study) to disbelieve medical studies but can you also give some specific examples of studies you distrust? What about e.g. ALLHAT and DATATOP trials? What do you think is wrong with them, exactly? Let me note that you seem to be giving a pretty big benefit of the doubt to the Rand study, and this despite it being rife with deficiencies visible even to my poorly trained eye. Are you giving such benefit of the doubt to every observational study of healthcare effects? Do you think that statisticians who vouch for the validity of individual, interventional clinical efficacy studies are all inept or fraudulent, while the ones who do aggregate observational studies are somehow closer to the truth? ----------------------------------------------------- > >Now, let me ask you a question: What procedure did you use to arrive > >at your present relative weighting of contradictory evidence > >regarding medicine, evidence where hundreds of thousands of largely > >concordant studies (animal, human, observational, interventional) > >united by a common theoretical background (life sciences, > >statistics) are contrasted with a few dozen observational (and one > >flawed interventional) studies with multiple confounding factors? > > All the clinical studies have multiple confounding factors too. I > don't see the relevance of a common theoretical background, and the > number of studies is far less important than the likely biases in > those studies. ### I disagree here. The degree of confidence you can have in a clinical study is dependent on the degree of consistency with a large body of experimental data from life sciences. If a drug is shown to reduce blood pressure in animals, and is safe in animals, it adds to the reliability of the clinical study. If animal models of hypertension show increased mortality which is controlled by the drug, then reports of decreased mortality in hypertensive humans are easier to accept as well. The number of studies is quite important as well, since in most cases additional studies are applying interventions in varied circumstances and with modifications, in addition to increasing the raw numbers of observed patients. If you have a dozen ACE inhibitors, all of which are reported by various groups to lower blood pressure and reduce the risk of stroke, using various paradigms (observational, interventional), both industry and public-funded, then to reject the conclusion that ACE inhibitors prevent stroke you need to postulate a bias acting uniformly in many different settings. And this brings me to the word "likely" that you used in reference to biases. You infer the existence of a general bias to report favorable results and to suppress unfavorable ones, affecting hundreds of thousands of scientists working in various settings, and you confidently predict (by using the word "likely") that the bias is large enough to hide deleterious medical treatments sufficient to overcome the combined effects of all interventions shown to work. Here is a short and non-exhaustive list of beneficial medical interventions: Kidney dialysis Appendectomy Diaper changing Antihypertensives Opiates for pain LASIK Catherization of obstructed bladder Disimpaction of an impacted bowel Insulin for diabetes type I and for some forms of diabetic coma Thiamine for Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome Vitamin B12 for subacute combined degeneration Vitamin C for scurvy Vaccination for smallpox, tetanus, etc. Thyroid hormones for hypothyroidism Thyroid ablation for hyperthyroidism Chemotherapy for seminoma Antibiotics for gastric ulcers Dopaminergics for Parkinson's disease Antiseizure medications for epilepsy Surgery for spinal stenosis Triptans for migraine The list could go on. Now, you may be convinced that all the allegations of benefits of the above interventions are due to fraud or ineptitude of the statisticians who vetted the study designs but you need to point out specific problems with the majority of the above examples before you can say you made your case. Alternatively, you have to provide examples of deleterious medical interventions that cancel the benefits of the above examples. Can you do either? ----------------------------------------------------- For clinical studies the probable sign of most complicating factors > is to make treatments look more beneficial than they actually > are. After all, most studies are funded or run by people who are > trying to make a treatment look good. So fraud, selection effects, > and treatment differences are likely to overestimate benefits. What > is less clear is the magnitude of those effects. > > The observational and experimental studies on the aggregate health > effects of medicine are also mostly funded and run by people who want > medicine to look effective. They are mostly embarrassed and > disappointed by their findings of no effect. So the likely sign of > bias is in the same direction, suggesting medicine has even lower > benefits than they find. Observational studies may indeed by missing > important controlling factors, but I don't see a reason to expect any > particular sign for this bias. And for these studies one needs no > assumption about the average effect of treatments for which there are > no studies - all treatments are included in the data. ### You still didn't tell me how you weigh the evidence: on one side hundreds of thousands of independent yet mutually supportive results, obtained under conditions where confounding factors can be largely excluded (RCTs, lab studies), on the other side a few dozen observational studies of aggregate outcomes of spending, where confounding factors are myriad. I feel that your above divagations on the likely wishes and disappointments of the respective groups of scientists are somewhat wanting, especially in the quantitative sense. Essentially you are basing your case on psychology and non-quantitative allegations of bias. Give me some numbers - for every proven intervention give a disproof, or a counterbalancing harmful intervention. Otherwise you remain unconvincing. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 21:55:51 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:55:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet In-Reply-To: <20051128213038.GK2249@leitl.org> References: <00f601c5f37c$8325bd30$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <011301c5f382$a2c71020$3b074e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128131139.01d58120@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20051128205207.GB2249@leitl.org> <20051128213038.GK2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:30:39 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 04:04:20PM -0500, gts wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:52:07 -0500, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> >>>> Thinking about insects, probably they live entirely in the present, >>>> with no self-concept and zero recall of their qualia.... something >>>> like >> >>watching a movie frame by frame but always forgetting the previous >> >>frames. >> > >> >You are wrong, again. >> >> Only an insect could know I was wrong. > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=insect+long-term+memory&btnG=Google+Search I'm not suggesting they can't learn, Eugen. Memory alone does not imply the ability to recall qualia. Show me the evidence that insects can recall their qualia in the sense that I (and presumably you) do when recalling *what it was like* to experience a color. This requires seeing something in the "mind's eye". I doubt insects are sufficiently advanced to have anything like a mind's eye. Probably they *see* images but cannot *form* them, i.e., probably they cannot *imaginate*. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 28 22:20:22 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:20:22 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Eliezer, I've always wondered what your opinion on qualia and phenomenal properties was. You give a hint here when you say: > Of course people who try to invent a separate magisterium just end up > inventing hypotheses about things that exist and make other things > happen - no matter how often the speaker repeats phrases like > "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium". Did you read my post with subject: "spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.)"? When I talk about phenomenal properties of matter in addition to causal properties of matter - this is something real and not something like you are referring to here as "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium" right? Just wanting to know your opinion - and whether or not you are willing to take me up on my bet if your opinion is different than mine. Thanks, Brent Allsop From rhanson at gmu.edu Mon Nov 28 22:20:46 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:20:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20051122214858.01c32070@mail.comcast.net> <00d801c5f048$ff8c3f20$8d054e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.5.6.2.20051127224421.02e4ef68@gmu.edu> <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128171652.02ddfbe8@gmu.edu> At 03:55 PM 11/28/2005, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: >I had been surprised and slightly worried by people who don't grasp >this point. It took me a while to realize that many people simply >haven't made the emotional connection between the word "causal" and >their everyday concept of things that make other things >happen. Sort of like people who repeat phrases like "religion is >not a falsifiable hypothesis; it belongs to a separate magisterium" >and then in the next breath pray for a friend's welfare. Or like >people who say that free will isn't "physical", and then decide what >to eat for breakfast. They haven't made the connection between >highfalutin' words like "causal", "physical", "falsifiable" and the >underlying notions of things that make other things happen, things >that exist, and things they expect to happen. This worries me too. People in my classes often read the textbook chapter, listen to lecture, and think they understand. They only find they don't understand when they try to do problems. Which is why I assign concrete problems exercising the abstractions. Alas when people read things for fun, they usually don't assign themselves problems. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From rhanson at gmu.edu Mon Nov 28 22:26:39 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:26:39 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> At 02:54 PM 11/28/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: > > But how will you know *that* you are effing? Say we find some weird > > particle that interacts with brains and correlates with states of > > awareness. Say with the help of such particles we let you and your wife > > mix up your minds, so that your brain gets input directly from her brain. > > How will you know this isn't just some fancy hookup to her > brain-as-computer > > that allows you to treat her as a video game? How will you know you are > > accessing her qualia? > >You are right, strictly speaking, effing, alone will not let you know with >absolute surety that you have the right phenomenal property in the >destination mind. > >You are hypothesizing that qualia will correlate with "some weird particle" >that we find. I am hypothesizing that it will be an additional causal >property of matter (particles?) we already causally know about which >correlates to phenomenal properties. Whatever qualia turns out to be - the >effing answers below will still be the same. Whatever additional stuff you find that correlates with phenomenal properties, how will you know that *that* is qualia? We can already look at brains and see that their activity correlates with phenomenal properties. How will this new stuff be different, so that we have more confidence that it is qualia? Seems to me that it is turtles all the way down. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 28 22:51:25 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:51:25 -0700 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Robin Hanson, > Whatever additional stuff you find that correlates with phenomenal > properties, > how will you know that *that* is qualia? We can already look at brains > and > see that their activity correlates with phenomenal properties. How will > this > new stuff be different, so that we have more confidence that it is qualia? > Seems to me that it is turtles all the way down. When, in your field of vision you see a patch of red, next to a patch of green, next to a patch of a new phenomenal property that you have never experienced before (say a tetrachromat is effing to you who is a normal trichromat) you will know you are effing. Even if it is turtles all the way down (yea right!) who will care? Right? Brent Allsop From sentience at pobox.com Mon Nov 28 22:59:38 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:59:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <438B8BDA.6050800@pobox.com> Brent Allsop wrote: > Eliezer, > > I've always wondered what your opinion on qualia and phenomenal properties > was. By reading between the lines of http://yudkowsky.net/bayes/technical.html you can get a pretty good idea. >>Of course people who try to invent a separate magisterium just end up >>inventing hypotheses about things that exist and make other things >>happen - no matter how often the speaker repeats phrases like >>"non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium". > > Did you read my post with subject: "spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia > Bet.)"? If you toss the mystery from hand to hand enough times, you may eventually give yourself the illusion of understanding it. It is sort of like how would-be inventors of inertialess drives add on more and more gears, until they finally make a mistake in their calculations, drop a quantity, and so conclude that their sealed motor produces a nonzero force. > When I talk about phenomenal properties of matter in addition to causal > properties of matter - this is something real and not something like you are > referring to here as "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate > magisterium" right? You are overcomplicating things. Does the "phenomenal" property cause, through whatever sequence, motor neurons to fire and your lips to utter the word "phenomenal"? If not, then how do you know about it? And if yes, then why isn't it a causal property? This is what Robin Hanson and I think you're failing to get. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 23:04:33 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 23:04:33 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On 11/28/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > Robin Hanson, > > > Whatever additional stuff you find that correlates with phenomenal > > properties, > > how will you know that *that* is qualia? We can already look at brains > > and > > see that their activity correlates with phenomenal properties. How will > > this > > new stuff be different, so that we have more confidence that it is > qualia? > > Seems to me that it is turtles all the way down. > > When, in your field of vision you see a patch of red, next to a patch of > green, next to a patch of a new phenomenal property that you have never > experienced before (say a tetrachromat is effing to you who is a normal > trichromat) you will know you are effing. Even if it is turtles all the > way > down (yea right!) who will care? Right? > > I don't think that is a viable answer. LSD can provide access (?) to unique qualia never before experienced. That does not mean that it embodies those qualia. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 23:15:49 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:45:49 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> On 29/11/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > Eliezer, > > I've always wondered what your opinion on qualia and phenomenal properties > was. You give a hint here when you say: > > > Of course people who try to invent a separate magisterium just end up > > inventing hypotheses about things that exist and make other things > > happen - no matter how often the speaker repeats phrases like > > "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium". > > Did you read my post with subject: "spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia > Bet.)"? > > When I talk about phenomenal properties of matter in addition to causal > properties of matter - this is something real and not something like you are > referring to here as "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate > magisterium" right? > "phenomenal properties in addition to causal" *means* you think there are relevant non-causal properties of conciousness, which is a "separate magisterium". Bot Robin and Eli have brought up the same point that I did early in this discussion - somewhere you need a magic connection between that "non-causal" stuff and your mundane causal neural network, or you can't have cognition about qualia. So if these phenomenal properties are not just figments of our imagination, or epiphenomenal if you wish to euphemize, you must in principle be able to map out the machinery of the brain and find a point where neurons fire, in some coherent, systematic way, but due to no observable cause. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 43028 (http://nanowrimo.org) From allsop at extropy.org Mon Nov 28 23:17:14 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:17:14 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <438B8BDA.6050800@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200511282317.jASNHfYl003587@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Eliezer, > You are overcomplicating things. Does the "phenomenal" property cause, > through whatever sequence, motor neurons to fire and your lips to utter > the word "phenomenal"? If not, then how do you know about it? And if > yes, then why isn't it a causal property? This is what Robin Hanson and > I think you're failing to get. As I have said before, phenomenal properties are also causal. Phenomenal properties are in addition to the causal properties our cause and effect senses can detect. We are aware of a field of green leaves and a red strawberry amongst them. Since we know the phenomenal difference between red and green, we are able to will our hand to move causing neurons to fire causing our real hand to pick the red strawberry. This is how the phenomenal properties have effect in this world. If we did not know the phenomenal difference between red and green, there would be no causal effect in the world and we would not be able to find the strawberry and pick it. Brent Allsop From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 23:40:24 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:10:24 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> On 26/11/05, gts wrote: > I don't see the "qualia" and "God" concepts as in the same category here. > Few people claim to have seen God but almost everyone will acknowledge > seeing qualia. Qualia are the object of our inquiry here, not an answer to > it. > > Religion/God/Mysticism/Cartesian-Dualism is one answer to the question of > qualia, but one that most extropians and transhumanists would probably > prefer to reject. The need for divine intervention would make the > extropian dream of strong AI enormously more difficult and intimidating. > How would we persuade or force God to inject souls into our machines? > Oh I don't know. God, if she's out there, has been so careful to be consistent across the universe, that she's hardly likely to let something as bleedingly obvious as qualia catch her out. This devious "proof denies faith" God would need to have made these qualia attach to everything that could be conscious, in order not to give the game away. So, if there is a God out there, injecting souls into the intelligent critters of the universe, I expect that our AIs will turn out to have an indistinguishable ability to report that they have qualia, the same way we do, if they are architected in a similar way to the human brain. There may also be AIs we make that don't know what this qualia stuff is, but that'll probably be due to architectural limitations in the design of their minds. Poor AIs. The real cosmic joke on us of course is that this evidence would also directly support the materialist theory, that reports of our qualia have be greatly exaggerated. That qualia are just a figment of our mental architecture. Danged godless heathens! They find a way to get around everything! -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 43028 (http://nanowrimo.org) From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Mon Nov 28 23:42:41 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 23:42:41 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> References: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/28/05, Emlyn wrote: > > On 29/11/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > Eliezer, > > > > I've always wondered what your opinion on qualia and phenomenal > properties > > was. You give a hint here when you say: > > > > > Of course people who try to invent a separate magisterium just end up > > > inventing hypotheses about things that exist and make other things > > > happen - no matter how often the speaker repeats phrases like > > > "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate magisterium". > > > > Did you read my post with subject: "spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] > Qualia > > Bet.)"? > > > > When I talk about phenomenal properties of matter in addition to causal > > properties of matter - this is something real and not something like you > are > > referring to here as "non-causal", "unobservable", and "separate > > magisterium" right? > > > > "phenomenal properties in addition to causal" *means* you think there > are relevant non-causal properties of conciousness, which is a > "separate magisterium". Bot Robin and Eli have brought up the same > point that I did early in this discussion - somewhere you need a magic > connection between that "non-causal" stuff and your mundane causal > neural network, or you can't have cognition about qualia. So if these > phenomenal properties are not just figments of our imagination, or > epiphenomenal if you wish to euphemize, you must in principle be able > to map out the machinery of the brain and find a point where neurons > fire, in some coherent, systematic way, but due to no observable > cause. > Which Hammeroff and Penrose attempt. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 29 00:02:04 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:02:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> References: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128175755.01de00f0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:45 AM 11/29/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >you must in principle be able >to map out the machinery of the brain and find a point where neurons >fire, in some coherent, systematic way, but due to no observable >cause. You ever read JohnJoe McFadden http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/ or Evan Harris Walker http://users.erols.com/wcri/CONSCIOUSNESS.html or even Aussie Nobelist neurologist Sir John Eccles, who all think QT does the trick? Damien From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 29 00:05:14 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:05:14 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128180352.01ddfd18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:10 AM 11/29/2005 +1030, Emmers wrote: >The real cosmic joke on us of course is that this evidence would also >directly support the materialist theory, that reports of our qualia >have be greatly exaggerated. That qualia are just a figment of our >mental architecture. A pigment of our imagination... Damien Broderick From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 00:26:12 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:26:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:07:36 -0500, Dirk Bruere wrote: > Even if that is true, it still leaves open the question of the > communication between matter and intelligence such that qualia are > appreciated. > If every bit of information processed results in a speck of > consciousness/qualia or whatever, what is the mechanism that 'sees' it > and reports it to other? My view here is similar to Brent's. Either awareness arises as some new magical property out of unaware matter (emergentism), or else it is present in all matter (pan-psychism). I reject the former and accept the latter. Brent calls this "phenomenal properties of matter". I believe we are proposing the same idea, more or less. I think neurons in the brain experience a color when the light stimulus makes an imprint in them. We don't know the exact mechanism, but obviously it involves physical changes within or among neurons. In my view that physical change *is* awareness. Furthermore I think awareness happens whenever any physical object is affected by any stimulus. Higher organisms like humans experience the world and also *reflect* on their experience. I suppose this involves other neurons observing the changes made to the neurons above. This makes us not only aware, but self-aware. This is consciousness, not to be confused with awareness. The key point here is that experience is in the initial imprint. An organism can have experiences without the ability to reflect on them, as is probably the case for example with insects. A brain without the ability to reflect on experience would be analogous to a camera: aware but not self-aware and not conscious. In this respect insects are similar to robotic cameras equipped with some programming. As John has pointed out, one could say that I am rendering the word "awareness" meaningless, because if everything is aware then it makes no sense to point at something and call it aware. He's right. Eugen has accused me of arguing for animism, but I am not suggesting animism or any other form of vitalism. If my insight here is correct then strong AI becomes more feasible. It should be possible to build a machine out of inanimate materials that experiences qualia. If the machine is modeled on and functionally equivalent to the brain then it will experience qualia, and seem to itself to be as alive as you and me. -gts From russell.wallace at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 01:03:47 2005 From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:03:47 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <8d71341e0511281703h3e08b18u2e8d71d334b8c4f1@mail.gmail.com> On 11/28/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > P.S. Is no one interested in taking my bet? It strikes me as somewhat like taking a bet on the color of Darth Vader's underwear - it's not at all clear to me how any of this is even in principle verifiable or falsifiable. Do you have a formulation of the proposition to be bet on, that could be verified to both parties' satisfaction when the time comes? - Russell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From transhumanist at goldenfuture.net Tue Nov 29 01:23:48 2005 From: transhumanist at goldenfuture.net (Joseph Bloch) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:23:48 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0511281703h3e08b18u2e8d71d334b8c4f1@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <8d71341e0511281703h3e08b18u2e8d71d334b8c4f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <438BADA4.6060005@goldenfuture.net> Blue, perhaps? http://www.geocities.com/FashionAvenue/Catwalk/8809/packages/dvunderoos.jpg ;-) Sorry... needed a lighter moment, and your post fell into my sights. Joseph Russell Wallace wrote: > On 11/28/05, *Brent Allsop* > wrote: > > P.S. Is no one interested in taking my bet? > > > It strikes me as somewhat like taking a bet on the color of Darth > Vader's underwear - it's not at all clear to me how any of this is > even in principle verifiable or falsifiable. From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 01:27:51 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:27:51 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, gts wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:07:36 -0500, Dirk Bruere > wrote: > > > Even if that is true, it still leaves open the question of the > > communication between matter and intelligence such that qualia are > > appreciated. > > If every bit of information processed results in a speck of > > consciousness/qualia or whatever, what is the mechanism that 'sees' it > > and reports it to other? > > My view here is similar to Brent's. > > Either awareness arises as some new magical property out of unaware matter > (emergentism), or else it is present in all matter (pan-psychism). I > reject the former and accept the latter. Brent calls this "phenomenal > properties of matter". I believe we are proposing the same idea, more or > less. > > I think neurons in the brain experience a color when the light stimulus > makes an imprint in them. We don't know the exact mechanism, but obviously > it involves physical changes within or among neurons. In my view that > physical change *is* awareness. Furthermore I think awareness happens > whenever any physical object is affected by any stimulus. > > If this is so it seems that the interface has got to involve QM. In which case true AI is going to be a lot harder than we imagine, not to mention uploading, since there is a hardware dependency. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell.wallace at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 01:37:05 2005 From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:37:05 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <438BADA4.6060005@goldenfuture.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051127223734.02e87eb0@gmu.edu> <200511281954.jASJsfta017249@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <8d71341e0511281703h3e08b18u2e8d71d334b8c4f1@mail.gmail.com> <438BADA4.6060005@goldenfuture.net> Message-ID: <8d71341e0511281737n6634cfe2x46dd265d2a3c3762@mail.gmail.com> On 11/29/05, Joseph Bloch wrote: > > Blue, perhaps? Ah, but does it possess the qualia of genuine blueness, or does it merely reflect photons of wavelength around 500 nanometers? :) - Russell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 29 01:48:47 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:48:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 28, 2005, at 4:26 PM, gts wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 15:07:36 -0500, Dirk Bruere > wrote: > > >> Even if that is true, it still leaves open the question of the >> communication between matter and intelligence such that qualia are >> appreciated. >> If every bit of information processed results in a speck of >> consciousness/qualia or whatever, what is the mechanism that >> 'sees' it and reports it to other? >> > > My view here is similar to Brent's. > > Either awareness arises as some new magical property out of unaware > matter (emergentism), or else it is present in all matter (pan- > psychism). I reject the former and accept the latter. Brent calls > this "phenomenal properties of matter". I believe we are proposing > the same idea, more or less. Neither magic or pan-psychism is required. Awareness can be had by proper programming in brains. It is not that terribly difficult. > > I think neurons in the brain experience a color when the light > stimulus makes an imprint in them. We don't know the exact > mechanism, but obviously it involves physical changes within or > among neurons. In my view that physical change *is* awareness. > Furthermore I think awareness happens whenever any physical object > is affected by any stimulus. > We know enough about the visual subsystem to know that light itself doesn't make an imprint on neurons. Awareness requires a self-model, a bit of recursive wiring/programming. It is pointless to lean toward believing awareness is synonymous with cause and effect. > Higher organisms like humans experience the world and also > *reflect* on their experience. I suppose this involves other > neurons observing the changes made to the neurons above. This makes > us not only aware, but self-aware. This is consciousness, not to be > confused with awareness. If we are talking about qualia then this reflection is essential. > > The key point here is that experience is in the initial imprint. An > organism can have experiences without the ability to reflect on > them, as is probably the case for example with insects. A brain > without the ability to reflect on experience would be analogous to > a camera: aware but not self-aware and not conscious. In this > respect insects are similar to robotic cameras equipped with some > programming. Then this is not qualia. > > If my insight here is correct then strong AI becomes more feasible. > It should be possible to build a machine out of inanimate materials > that experiences qualia. If the machine is modeled on and > functionally equivalent to the brain then it will experience > qualia, and seem to itself to be as alive as you and me. > All life came from and is composed of inanimate materials! So obviously it is possible to construct something that has awareness from inanimate materials. - samantha From joel.pitt at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 01:50:45 2005 From: joel.pitt at gmail.com (Joel Peter William Pitt) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:50:45 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: IQ distribution results Message-ID: Hi all, I've summarised the results of the collected IQ scores and posted an entry on my blog: http://ferrouswheel.blogspot.com/2005/11/transhuman-community-iqs.html The quick info: I got 18 replies from the extropy-chat and 11 from SL4. For extropy-chat the mean was 138.1, s.d. 3.9. For SL4 the mean was 137.9, s.d. 3.7. These values were not significantly different as judged by a two sample t-test. More details in the blog entry. Also, could we please keep any discussion about this on the blog entry. I apoligise for the flood of list posts after my request for IQ results and will next time be more explicit about getting people to reply to me offlist instead. (This holds mainly for SL4 which is more strict about posting policy). Cheers, Joel P.S. I didn't include my score, but suffice to say that I'm on both lists and fall squarely at the mid point of the means. :) From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 02:13:59 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 21:13:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:48:47 -0500, Samantha Atkins wrote: > All life came from and is composed of inanimate materials! So obviously > it is possible to construct something that has awareness from inanimate > materials. Right. Those who don't believe all matter is aware should be very puzzled about their own awareness. What kind of spooky magic happened on the day inanimate materials became aware? Maybe that day never happened. -gts From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 29 02:36:56 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:36:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this fruitless thread. - samantha On Nov 28, 2005, at 6:13 PM, gts wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:48:47 -0500, Samantha Atkins > wrote: > > >> All life came from and is composed of inanimate materials! So >> obviously it is possible to construct something that has awareness >> from inanimate materials. >> > > Right. Those who don't believe all matter is aware should be very > puzzled about their own awareness. What kind of spooky magic > happened on the day inanimate materials became aware? > > Maybe that day never happened. > > -gts > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 02:55:09 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 02:55:09 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this > fruitless thread. > > Not really. If awareness is simply information processing then all matter processes information most of the time. Or does it? See QM etc Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 03:07:48 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:37:48 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128175755.01de00f0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <438B6EDF.9020008@pobox.com> <200511282220.jASMKgT4030161@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <710b78fc0511281515g33f71657g@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128175755.01de00f0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511281907k40b28259q@mail.gmail.com> On 29/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:45 AM 11/29/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > >you must in principle be able > >to map out the machinery of the brain and find a point where neurons > >fire, in some coherent, systematic way, but due to no observable > >cause. > > You ever read JohnJoe McFadden > > http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/ > > or Evan Harris Walker > > http://users.erols.com/wcri/CONSCIOUSNESS.html > > or even Aussie Nobelist neurologist Sir John Eccles, who all think QT does > the trick? > > Damien No I haven't. Thanks for the links. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 43028 (http://nanowrimo.org) From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 03:10:49 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:40:49 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511281910r1289835ao@mail.gmail.com> On 29/11/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this > fruitless thread. > > - samantha > > When you have it running, do be sure to post a link... -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 43028 (http://nanowrimo.org) From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 29 03:12:04 2005 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:12:04 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Someday you will understand how qualia work. And when you do, you are going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia turn out to be PLAIN OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary physics, just like the LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species encountered, from stars to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what makes the mistake EMBARASSING. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 03:18:14 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:48:14 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128180352.01ddfd18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128180352.01ddfd18@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511281918i5aef27edn@mail.gmail.com> On 29/11/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:10 AM 11/29/2005 +1030, Emmers wrote: > > >The real cosmic joke on us of course is that this evidence would also > >directly support the materialist theory, that reports of our qualia > >have be greatly exaggerated. That qualia are just a figment of our > >mental architecture. > > A pigment of our imagination... > > Damien Broderick > Talking of pigments... Everyone here is aware that we can't *really* see the whole visible light spectrum, right, that we can't tell the differences between some colours and combinations of others? For instance, if we see pure yellow light, it stimulates red and green receptors in equal measure in our retinas, just like a mix of red and green light would do. And in both cases, we presumably experience the qualia for yellow. Why? Why don't we experience red and green qualia at the same time, when we see a mix of red and green? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 43028 (http://nanowrimo.org) From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 03:24:02 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 03:24:02 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > > On 11/29/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > > SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this > > fruitless thread. > > > > > Not really. > If awareness is simply information processing then all matter processes > information most of the time. > Or does it? See QM etc > And a last thought before bed... Consciousness is the quale of information processing. Well, that's one variable taken care of... Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 03:24:52 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 03:24:52 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > > Someday you will understand how qualia work. And when you do, you are > going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia turn out to be PLAIN > OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary physics, just like the > LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species encountered, from > stars to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what makes the mistake > EMBARASSING. > It may be physics, but I suspect it will be PLAIN NEW PHYSICS. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 29 03:33:32 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:33:32 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511290333.jAT3XYe10445@tick.javien.com> Dirk, these LSD comments are making me squirm. If some gullible soul on this list tries the stuff and perhaps suffers truly bad consequences, are you ok with that? I wish to clarify my own previous tolerant comments towards drugs: that was for marijuana and the other well-known less dangerous recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. spike _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere ...(yea right!) who will care? Right? I don't think that is a viable answer. LSD can provide access (?) to unique qualia never before experienced. That does not mean that it embodies those qualia. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 29 03:49:37 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:49:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Qualia In-Reply-To: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128224109.02e844f8@gmu.edu> If you want to learn, and you are not at the forefront of the field you want to learn about, your most efficient strategy is to read and study textbooks, when they are available. Reading this summary is more informative than reading ten times the words of random mailing list posts: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia/ Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 03:59:08 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:59:08 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: Mary is trapped in a black and white world, but knows every possible bit of knowledge about both old and new physics, about biology, and about neuroscience. If there is anything that can be known about these subjects, she knows it. She knows the physics and neuroscience of color perception, for example the color red. One day she escapes into the world of color and sees red for the first time. Did Mary just acquire additional knowledge about the color red? I think so. But it is not intellectual knowledge. It is phenomenal knowledge. Seems to me that if her brain can acquire phenomenal knowledge separate from intellectual knowledge, then it must contain matter that experiences phenomena, and that this matter is separate from the matter that intellectualizes about the phenomena. The film sees the color, the chip talks about it. -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 29 04:43:26 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:43:26 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] PLAIN OLD PHYSICS In-Reply-To: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128223812.01e581a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:12 PM 11/28/2005 -0800, Eliezer wrote: >Someday you will understand how qualia work. And when you do, you are >going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia turn out to be PLAIN >OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary physics, just like the >LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species encountered, from stars >to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what makes the mistake EMBARASSING. SORT of. It depends, as always, on the EVIDENCE and the power of available THEORIES. Until a bit over a century ago, scientists would have scoffed at the idea of RADIOACTIVITY. If they'd known of its existence, they'd have been certain also that it could be explained by PLAIN OLD PHYSICS. What JACKASSES. Meanwhile: ============== Next June 18-22, 2006, the University of San Diego will host the 87th Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division of the AAAS. As part of this wide-ranging conference (biology, chemistry, physics, psychology, marine and environmental science), AAAS will host a symposium tentatively called "Frontiers of Time: Reverse Causation -- Experiment and Theory." Frontiers of Time: Reverse Causation -- Experiment and Theory Causality, the notion that earlier events can affect later events, but not vice versa, undergirds our experience of reality and physical law. Causality is predicated on the forward unidirectionality of time, however, most physical laws are time symmetric; that is, they formally and equally admit both time-forward and time-reverse solutions. Time-reverse solutions are distressing because they would allow the future to influence the past, i.e., reverse (or retro-) causation. Why time-forward solutions are preferentially observed in nature remains an unresolved problem in physics. (While the most convincing explanations invoke the second law of thermodynamics or the expansion of the universe, in the end, purely forward causation is an ad hoc physical assumption. Some recent experimental results from the domain of parapsychology, including human psychophysiological responses to future stimuli and mind-matter interactions with random physical systems provide evidence for reverse causation effects at the macroscopic scale. While laboratory evidence is intriguing, theoretical models to explain such outcomes have lagged; those that exist have not yet made deep enough connections with fundamental physics. Furthermore, even the most basic physical constraints -- e.g., whether reverse causation is best explained by energy transfers or simply by correlations without information exchange -- remain open questions. This symposium will explore recent experiments, theory, and philosophical issues connected with reverse causation. In particular, it is hoped that this meeting will help: i) generate better theoretical models by which established experimental results can be understood; 2) devise new experiments by which the underlying physics may be more clearly exposed; and 3) establish fruitful research collaborations. ============== Damien Broderick From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 06:45:06 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:45:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20051129064506.23227.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote: > Someday you will understand how qualia work. And > when you do, you are > going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia > turn out to be PLAIN > OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary > physics, just like the > LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species > encountered, from > stars to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what > makes the mistake > EMBARASSING. Yeah, phlogiston was wrong but it was close. Phlogiston theory simply said that materials that burned or corroded LOST a substance (phlogiston) as opposed to the modern understanding in which they gain a substance (oxygen). To me, this is like getting the correct numerical answer with the wrong sign (i.e. negative instead of positive). So while wrong, the theory was not THAT wrong and it is only with the good fortune of modern understanding that we have the hubris to call it EMBARASSING. As far as elan vital goes, I have never seen any disproof of it at all. In fact, modern reductionism has almost lent credence to the idea by its glaring failure to DISPROVE it. After all, to this day, if you take a bacterium apart molecularly using biochemical techniques then all the king's horses and all the king's men can't put the bacterium back together again. Why is this? If it is a simple matter of physicalist mechanism, then it should be simple to do so. Instead of disproving elan vital, science found that life was composed of nucleic acids, proteins, lipids, sugars, a few trace minerals, and cofactors and thereby has taken on BLIND FAITH that a living organism was no more than the sum of its parts. I am an empiricist and so I don't take anything on blind faith, even if it is the party line. Elan vital, even by Bayesian standards, has a non-zero probability. If you want to end elan vital's viability as a valid hypothesis, then this is the experiment that must be done - Take the simplest living organism you can find, kill it, and bring it back to life. You know every chemical constituent in the living thing, you know about electrochemical gradients, and you have all the thermodynamic data, so that is your head start. If the physicalists are right, then it should be trivial. If you can't do that, then create one living thing. It does not have to be strong AI, it just has to be unequivocally alive. Incidently, physics, in my opinion, has always danced AROUND the question of life other than vague thermodynamic descriptions of the phenomenon of life that are so general as to be rather useless. (e.g "it is an open thermodynamic system far from equibrium that reduces its own entropy at the cost of increasing the entropy of its surroundings") If it was that simple, there wouldn't BE a field of science separate from physics called biology. In life and in science mistakes happen. If you waste time being embarassed by your mistakes, you miss the value of your mistakes entirely. If you can prove me wrong about this, I will happily eat crow in my new found enlightenment. I will personally hail you as a genius. I wish you luck. BTW on the question of spirit . . . what is it that makes, in nearly all cases of identical twins that I am aware of that live together and share an identical environment, one twin dominant over the other? If it is neither nature nor nurture, than what is it? The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 07:04:21 2005 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 02:04:21 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051129064506.23227.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> References: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <20051129064506.23227.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60511282304m697322a5of58bfa8293437bb8@mail.gmail.com> On 11/29/05, The Avantguardian wrote: If it was that > simple, there wouldn't BE a field of science separate > from physics called biology. ### But biology, good quality biology at least, *is* a subfield of physics. It describes the behaviors of certain assemblages of atoms. Now, since these assemblages are rather complicated, many of the questions and answers are complex ones, too, but always built of, and reducible to, simple questions about atoms. Our minds cannot deal for technical reasons with biological problems expressed in physics terminology, because we can manipulate only small numbers of questions at the same time. The huge numbers of simple physical issues you have to handle to answer how a bacterium grows are still beyond even the power of the biggest machines, but this is a reflection of our limitations, and not of an underlying chasm between physics and biology. Given enough computing power, all science becomes physics. Rafal From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 29 09:27:04 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:27:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> Message-ID: <99A431E0-288D-4121-9B21-0B78AEE71428@mac.com> Not in the sense necessary for qualia. Which is the nub of the entire thread. Different people are acting as if qualia means different things. Nothing can be resolved like this. - s On Nov 28, 2005, at 6:55 PM, Dirk Bruere wrote: > > > On 11/29/05, Samantha Atkins wrote: > SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this > fruitless thread. > > > Not really. > If awareness is simply information processing then all matter > processes information most of the time. > Or does it? See QM etc > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 29 09:32:10 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:32:10 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511290333.jAT3XYe10445@tick.javien.com> References: <200511290333.jAT3XYe10445@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <83F6F87B-0C31-4C85-971D-F7CF45BCB347@mac.com> Spike, you have no right or reason to tell people they can't make positive comments about drugs you may not approve of. LSD, despite the fact I haven't used it in a whole lot of years, got an undeservedly bad rap. I will not be silent when I see more of the same here. It is powerful medicine and in the right hands and setting truly useful. It is not "too dangerous" per se. - samantha On Nov 28, 2005, at 7:33 PM, spike wrote: > Dirk, these LSD comments are making me squirm. If some > > gullible soul on this list tries the stuff and perhaps suffers > > truly bad consequences, are you ok with that? I wish to > > clarify my own previous tolerant comments towards drugs: > > that was for marijuana and the other well-known less dangerous > > recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad > > medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. > > > > spike > > > > > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere > ...(yea right!) who will care? Right? > > > I don't think that is a viable answer. > LSD can provide access (?) to unique qualia never before experienced. > That does not mean that it embodies those qualia. > > Dirk > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 14:17:14 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:17:14 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511290333.jAT3XYe10445@tick.javien.com> References: <200511290333.jAT3XYe10445@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, spike wrote: > > Dirk, these LSD comments are making me squirm. If some > > gullible soul on this list tries the stuff and perhaps suffers > > truly bad consequences, are you ok with that? I wish to > Yes. Everything has a price. clarify my own previous tolerant comments towards drugs: > > that was for marijuana and the other well-known less dangerous > > recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad > > medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. > I disagree. IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - and this certainly includes alcohol. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 14:20:41 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:20:41 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] PLAIN OLD PHYSICS In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051128223812.01e581a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128223812.01e581a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > > At 07:12 PM 11/28/2005 -0800, Eliezer wrote: > > >Someday you will understand how qualia work. And when you do, you are > >going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia turn out to be PLAIN > >OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary physics, just like the > >LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species encountered, from > stars > >to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what makes the mistake EMBARASSING. > > SORT of. It depends, as always, on the EVIDENCE and the power of available > THEORIES. Until a bit over a century ago, scientists would have scoffed at > the idea of RADIOACTIVITY. If they'd known of its existence, they'd have > been certain also that it could be explained by PLAIN OLD PHYSICS. What > JACKASSES. > > Meanwhile: > > ============== > Next June 18-22, 2006, the University of San Diego will host the 87th > Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division of the AAAS. As part of this > wide-ranging conference (biology, chemistry, physics, psychology, marine > and environmental science), AAAS will host a symposium tentatively called > "Frontiers of Time: Reverse Causation -- Experiment and Theory." > > Frontiers of Time: Reverse Causation -- Experiment and Theory > > Causality, the notion that earlier events can affect later events, but not > vice versa, undergirds our experience of reality and physical law. > Causality is predicated on the forward unidirectionality of time, however, > most physical laws are time symmetric; that is, they formally and equally > admit both time-forward and time-reverse solutions. Time-reverse > solutions > are distressing because they would allow the future to influence the past, > i.e., reverse (or retro-) causation. Why time-forward solutions are > preferentially observed in nature remains an unresolved problem in > physics. > (While the most convincing explanations invoke the second law of > thermodynamics or the expansion of the universe, in the end, purely > forward > causation is an ad hoc physical assumption. > > Some recent experimental results from the domain of parapsychology, > including human psychophysiological responses to future stimuli and > mind-matter interactions with random physical systems provide evidence for > reverse causation effects at the macroscopic scale. While laboratory > evidence is intriguing, theoretical models to explain such outcomes have > lagged; those that exist have not yet made deep enough connections with > fundamental physics. Furthermore, even the most basic physical constraints > -- e.g., whether reverse causation is best explained by energy transfers > or > simply by correlations without information exchange -- remain open > questions. > > This symposium will explore recent experiments, theory, and philosophical > issues connected with reverse causation. In particular, it is hoped that > this meeting will help: i) generate better theoretical models by which > established experimental results can be understood; 2) devise new > experiments by which the underlying physics may be more clearly exposed; > and 3) establish fruitful research collaborations. > > ============== > > Damien Broderick > Exactly. I note that until now everyone has shied away from the word 'Psi'. I also believe that conventional notions of causality in physics will eventually be scrapped and replaced with 'consistency'. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Tue Nov 29 14:58:44 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:58:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID Message-ID: some big news in the last weeks: >Vatican official refutes intelligent design theory >http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=17691 I said : At 8:55 AM +0100 11/19/05, Amara Graps wrote: >Nice. I do wonder if Ratzinger is aware of what his chief astronomer >said, though. If any here have questions of the ID view from the Vatican >Observatory (that _other_ piece of the Vatican City country located in >the middle of Italy's Castel Gandolfo), I will be visiting there in >about 10 days and I can ask. I asked Guy Consolmagno at the Vatican Observatory (the man who made the statement in the news report: George Coyne is Consolmagno's boss). They are in accordance with each other. According to Guy, the Pope refutes intelligent design theory too. (I don't have words to describe the Vatican Observatory, every corner demonstrated a fantastic piece of history. Four-hundred year old books, research papers by Newton, Maxwell, scientific instruments for the most clever purpose, 19th century telescopes, original documents by the Apollo astronauts given as gifts to the Pope, a log book of visitor signatures that included Eddington, Hertzsprung, Russell, Oort... I was in another world for some hours.) Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 29 15:06:50 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:06:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511282317.jASNHfYl003587@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <004a01c5f4f6$969ab2a0$be064e0c@MyComputer> "Brent Allsop" > Phenomenal properties are in addition to the causal properties our cause > and effect senses can detect. So on Monday Wednesday and Friday Phenomenal properties can NOT be detected by cause and effect and so on those days I suggest you stop using euphuisms and just call it a soul. > If we did not know the phenomenal difference between red and > green, there would be no causal effect in the world and we would > not be able to find the strawberry and pick it. And on Tuesday Thursday and Saturday Phenomenal properties CAN be detected by cause and effect and the Turing Test works on those days. And on Sunday we rest. John K Clark From HerbM at learnquick.com Tue Nov 29 15:03:41 2005 From: HerbM at learnquick.com (Herb Martin) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:03:41 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: To Spike and Dirk: Spike wrote (earlier): > > recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad >> medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. Dirk wrote: > I disagree. > IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. > I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - and this certainly includes alcohol. What dangers? Compare any supposed 'possible dangers' to smoking drugs (marijuana, tobacco) or to other drugs ingested orally such as alcohol etc.... (both legal and commonly acceptable.) Seriously: I once did a thorough review of the academic literature of LSD "dangers" and found that there were practically none (except for the obvious issues with operating automobiles and heavy machinery), and that most of the supposed problems were actually urban myths. So please be specific if you know of actual problems stemming directly from such use... Of course one might make the argument that it is bad merely because it is illegal, but then marijuana (etc) must be treated similarly. Note: It is dangerous due merely to illegality as one could be sent to prison for many years and that is DEFINITELY a dangerous place. -- Herb Martin _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 6:17 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) On 11/29/05, spike wrote: Dirk, these LSD comments are making me squirm. If some gullible soul on this list tries the stuff and perhaps suffers truly bad consequences, are you ok with that? I wish to Yes. Everything has a price. clarify my own previous tolerant comments towards drugs: that was for marijuana and the other well-known less dangerous recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. I disagree. IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - and this certainly includes alcohol. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 29 15:29:15 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:29:15 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu><200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com><438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > Mary is trapped in a black and white world [...]One day she escapes into > the world of color and sees red for the first time. Did Mary just acquire > additional knowledge about the color red? Yes and we can prove it with the scientific method much easier than Galileo proved things about gravity by rolling balls down an incline plane. We just note that for the first time Marry can tell the difference between a red light and a white light; and that's not very phenomenal now is it. John K Clark From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 15:33:57 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:33:57 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Herb Martin wrote: > > *To Spike and Dirk:* > > *Spike wrote (earlier): > > > recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad > >> medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous.* > ** > *Dirk wrote:* > > I disagree. > > IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. > > I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - > and this certainly includes alcohol. > *What dangers? Compare any supposed 'possible dangers' to smoking > drugs (marijuana, tobacco) or to other drugs ingested orally such > as alcohol etc.... (both legal and commonly acceptable.)* > ** > *Seriously: I once did a thorough review of the academic literature > of LSD "dangers" and found that there were practically none (except* > *for the obvious issues with operating automobiles and heavy machinery),* > *and **that most of the supposed problems were actually urban myths.* > ** > *So please be specific if you know of actual problems stemming directly* > *from such use...* > There are two dangers. The one most commonly considered is the triggering of psychotic episodes in vulnerable people eg borderline schizophrenics. The other is less easy to quantify or even describe. It is unhappiness at having your worldview shattered, and not being able to piece together one as satifying as the previous set of illusions. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 29 15:51:39 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:51:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] PLAIN OLD PHYSICS References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu><200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com><438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128223812.01e581a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00d001c5f4fc$df76adc0$be064e0c@MyComputer> "Damien Broderick" > Until a bit over a century ago, scientists would have scoffed at > the idea of RADIOACTIVITY. A century ago some scientists did scoff that new physics was required to explain observations, but certainly not all! Using the Physics known at the time the sun couldn't be older than 50 million years and was probably less than 10, perhaps less than two; there was just no energy supply that could make the sun last longer. However Geologists and Biologists absolutely insisted the Earth was at least 500 million years old. There is no such contradiction between theory and observation in the case of intelligence or Qualia. John K Clark From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 29 15:56:17 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:56:17 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <7D3C8FA4-9B8D-4728-9A95-BFF818EEE60F@mac.com> Message-ID: <200511291556.jATFuJpE001997@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Samantha, > SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this > fruitless thread. > > - Samantha It is pointless - but you are still the one mistaken and therefore the one at fault or the one that must change so this will no longer be pointless. I bet you experiencing a color quale you have never experienced before would make you say something like: "Boy -what I was saying about software alone being able to do this was very stupid of me. That software program might claim to know what this new color is like - but it is obviously lying." Don't you think? Are you saying something like this will never happen? Brent Allsop From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 16:01:53 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:01:53 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] PLAIN OLD PHYSICS In-Reply-To: <00d001c5f4fc$df76adc0$be064e0c@MyComputer> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051128223812.01e581a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <00d001c5f4fc$df76adc0$be064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, John K Clark wrote: > > "Damien Broderick" > > > Until a bit over a century ago, scientists would have scoffed at > > the idea of RADIOACTIVITY. > > A century ago some scientists did scoff that new physics was required to > explain observations, but certainly not all! Using the Physics known at > the > time the sun couldn't be older than 50 million years and was probably > less than 10, perhaps less than two; there was just no energy supply that > could make the sun last longer. However Geologists and Biologists > absolutely insisted the Earth was at least 500 million years old. > There is no such contradiction between theory and observation in > the case of intelligence or Qualia. > Mainly due to lack of theory, I suspect... Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 29 16:52:26 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:52:26 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051129114015.02dd9bf0@gmu.edu> At 05:51 PM 11/28/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: > > Whatever additional stuff you find that correlates with phenomenal > > properties, how will you know that *that* is qualia? We can already > > look at brains and see that their activity correlates with phenomenal > > properties. How will this new stuff be different, so that we have more > > confidence that it is qualia? > >When, in your field of vision you see a patch of red, next to a patch of >green, next to a patch of a new phenomenal property that you have never >experienced before (say a tetrachromat is effing to you who is a normal >trichromat) you will know you are effing. I don't see why messing physically with brains, perhaps even just via ingesting odd chemicals, could not produce new phenomenal properties. So I don't see how making this happen via some new stuff could be taken as evidence that this new stuff is qualia. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From kevin at kevinfreels.com Tue Nov 29 17:07:28 2005 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevinfreels.com) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:07:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID References: Message-ID: <012501c5f507$61628570$0100a8c0@kevin> How refreshing! I especially liked this statement: "If they respect the results of modern science, and indeed the best of modern biblical research, religious believers must move away from the notion of a dictator God or a designer God, a Newtonian God who made the universe as a watch that ticks along regularly." This is a major shift in Christian thinking. I wonder if it will make it's way to the Baptists, or if they will just see this as another reason to dislike Catholics. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amara Graps" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 8:58 AM Subject: [extropy-chat] against ID > some big news in the last weeks: > > >Vatican official refutes intelligent design theory > >http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=17691 > > I said : > At 8:55 AM +0100 11/19/05, Amara Graps wrote: > >Nice. I do wonder if Ratzinger is aware of what his chief astronomer > >said, though. If any here have questions of the ID view from the Vatican > >Observatory (that _other_ piece of the Vatican City country located in > >the middle of Italy's Castel Gandolfo), I will be visiting there in > >about 10 days and I can ask. > > > I asked Guy Consolmagno at the Vatican Observatory (the man who made > the statement in the news report: George Coyne is Consolmagno's boss). > They are in accordance with each other. According to Guy, the Pope > refutes intelligent design theory too. > > (I don't have words to describe the Vatican Observatory, every corner > demonstrated a fantastic piece of history. Four-hundred year old > books, research papers by Newton, Maxwell, scientific instruments for > the most clever purpose, 19th century telescopes, original documents > by the Apollo astronauts given as gifts to the Pope, a log book of > visitor signatures that included Eddington, Hertzsprung, Russell, > Oort... I was in another world for some hours.) > > Amara > > > -- > > ******************************************************************** > Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com > Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt > Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ > ******************************************************************** > "It is intriguing to learn that the simplicity of the world depends > upon the temperature of the environment." ---John D. Barrow > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 29 16:59:15 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:59:15 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Eli, > Someday you will understand how qualia work. And when you do, you are > going to be WAY embarassed by the fact that qualia turn out to be PLAIN > OLD PHYSICS, not mysterious physics but ordinary physics, just like the > LAST SIX THOUSAND MYSTERIES that the human species encountered, from > stars to phlogiston to elan vital. That's what makes the mistake > EMBARASSING. It looks like we've got some problems with semantics or definitions here. You seem to be admitting that qualia exist. Do you admit that there are qalia? And if so, would you disagree with someone like Daniel Dennett that says "There are no qualia"? If so, this makes defining the terms of a bet a bit more difficult because I want to find someone like Dennett that is obviously brilliant but claiming qualia do not exist. If I defined quale to be a property or piece of information that could not be adequately described or communicated by abstract communication based only on the physics of cause and effect? Then would you say that qualia - as I've defined it here, do not exist? And what do you mean by "PLAIN OLD PHYSICS"? Do you mean that which is only causal? Or might something in addition to causality be included here as plain old physics as I claim? And by the way - would you describe a "quantum leap" where an electron disappears from one location and instantly appears at a very different location as "PLAIN OLD PHYSICS"? Because I would argue that the possibility of there being phenomenal properties that cannot be adequately described by abstract causal communication alone as much more "PLAIN OLD PHYSICS" than such "quantum leaps". Finally - how is this for a stab at the specification of terms of a bet?: I claim that before the end of 2015, you will admit the following: 1. There are qualia or phenomenal properties (as I've defined above.) 2. I was blind and stupid not to realize this sooner - and had I only thought about this more rigorously as many people less intelligent than myself (such as Brent Allsop) have done I would have noticed what should have been long ago blatantly obvious. 3. The discovery of qualia or phenomenal properties (which I once thought did not exist) which scientific evidence is now showing us do indeed exists is the most significant scientific discovery made to date and will more profoundly effect our future than any other thing we've so far discovered. If you will agree to pay me $100 if you, in your judgment, admit to all of these before the end of the year 2015 then I will agree to pay you $100 at the beginning of 2016 if you have not yet admitted the above and paid me. If not Eliezer, is there anyone else that would be willing to take such a bet? Could we persuade someone like Daniel Dennett to take such a bet? Or if some people don't like these terms - how might we tweak them so they are meaningful and agreeable to both parties? Brent Allsop From russell.wallace at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 17:25:49 2005 From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:25:49 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <8d71341e0511290925o1d725716ya82317a7281b387a@mail.gmail.com> On 11/29/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > If not Eliezer, is there anyone else that would be willing to take such a > bet? I might go for it if you come up with a definition of "qualia" that I can work with (your proposed definition doesn't mean anything at all to me - I couldn't tell you whether I think qualia exist _now_ from it, any more than I could tell you whether a snark is a boojum). Are you relying on new physics for this stuff? If you are, I can come up with a proposed definition. Or are you saying the mind is incomputable a la Penrose? If so, I can come up with a definition based on that. - Russell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 17:55:05 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:55:05 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051129064506.23227.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051129064506.23227.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 01:45:06 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > BTW on the question of spirit . . . what is it that > makes, in nearly all cases of identical twins that I > am aware of that live together and share an identical > environment, one twin dominant over the other? If it > is neither nature nor nurture, than what is it? I wonder why you seem to think this is not an example of nature or nurture. Humans tend to organize into hierarchies probably to avoid the "too many chiefs, not enough indians" syndrome. Also I wonder why you are defending elan vital. The pan-vitalism you described to me in the qualia thread is not elan vital. In fact I wonder why you consider it vitalism. You described a theory of life's origins entirely consistent with ordinary science, but in which biological life must have originated elsewhere at an earlier time. I don't see that you need anything like elan vital to defend your theory. -gts From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 19:06:47 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:06:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> --- gts wrote: > I wonder why you seem to think this is not an > example of nature or > nurture. Humans tend to organize into hierarchies > probably to avoid the > "too many chiefs, not enough indians" syndrome. I am simply suggesting that there are personality differences between individuals that cannot be explained simply by genetic or environmental differences. I used twins that live together to control for genetics and environment. Dominance was just an example of one such personality trait. There are many more that differ between identical twins. To me this demonstrates (albeit in an anecdotal fashion as I have only ever known 3 pairs of identical twins) the existense of qualia. Two twins, raised in the same environment, can recieve the same stimulus yet have two different experiences. > Also I wonder why you are defending elan vital. Probably because somebody worthy of disagreeing with is attacking it. ;) Plus it truly hasn't been disproven, it has only lost popularity. > The pan-vitalism you > described to me in the qualia thread is not elan > vital. In fact I wonder > why you consider it vitalism. Well it's mostly just semantics. I don't necessarily believe in elan vital per-se, although entangled bosons might fulfill a similar role. I do consider myself a neo-vitalist because my studies of biology have made it clear is that there is a lot more going on in the process of living than the text books can explain. There is a certain unusual coherence to and coupling of the chemical reactions of life that cannot be reproduced in vitro. For a thorough explanation of what I mean by this, I refer you to "The Rainbow and the Worm" by Mae-Wan Ho. In regards to the relationship of classical vitalism to my pan-vitalism hypothesis, there really isn't one at least not directly. It was mostly just the language I chose to use. I could have just as easily called it panbiogenesis which would probably have been more accurate but I was inspired by your frequent use of "pan-psychism" to call it that. > You described a theory > of life's origins > entirely consistent with ordinary science, but in > which biological life > must have originated elsewhere at an earlier time. I > don't see that you > need anything like elan vital to defend your theory. I don't. However a key point that you seem to miss is that I am proposing that "life began EVERYWHERE at an earlier time because back then the entire universe had certain chemical and thermodynamic properties that are now only found in living organisms". Specifically the observed coherent coupling of chemical reactions that I mentioned earlier that might or might not be explainable by entangled bosons. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 29 19:27:43 2005 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 20:27:43 +0100 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It may be physics, but I suspect it will be PLAIN NEW PHYSICS. Dirk It seems so (see the paper below). (But are there ineffable numbers? And if such numbers exist, are they qualia?). s. 'Mona Lisa - ineffable smile of quantum mechanics' Slobodan Prvanovic 13 pages, 3 figures http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0302089 'The portrait of Mona Lisa is scrutinized with reference to quantum mechanics. The elements of different expressions are firstly recognized on her face. The contradictory details are then classified in two pictures that, undoubtedly representing distinct moods, confirm dichotomous character of the original. Consecutive discussion has lead to conclusion that the mysterious state Mona Lisa is in actually is coherent mixture - superposition, of cheerfulness and sadness.' From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 19:27:31 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:27:31 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:29:15 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "gts" > >> Mary is trapped in a black and white world [...] One day she escapes >> into >> the world of color and sees red for the first time. Did Mary just >> acquire additional knowledge about the color red? > > Yes and we can prove it with the scientific method much easier than > Galileo proved things about gravity by rolling balls down an incline > plane. We just note that for the first time Marry can tell the > difference between a red > light and a white light; and that's not very phenomenal now is it. We can infer that Many acquired new knowledge because she will say something like, "Aha! So that's red looks like! I know something new!" However if we are still trapped in that black and white world then we cannot share in her new knowledge of what red looks like. It seems some part of the brain has the capacity to acquire pure phenomenal knowledge. If that knowledge acquisition works by physical rules, as I think it does, then that part of the brain functions something like camera film. When Mary sees red, some atoms/molecules/chemicals/cells get jumbled around physically. I think that physical change *is* experience, and I see no reason to think it does not apply to all physical change inside or outside the brain. We tend to think a brain cannot have experience unless it is conscious. However I think consciousness is merely the ability to ponder experience after the fact, not a prerequisite to the experience itself. I think insects experience the world through their eyes and other senses, even though insect brains are very primitive and probably leave them too dumb and unconscious to reflect consciously on experience. -gts From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 19:40:38 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:40:38 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/29/05, scerir wrote: > > It may be physics, but I suspect it will be PLAIN NEW PHYSICS. > Dirk > > It seems so (see the paper below). (But are there ineffable > numbers? And if such numbers exist, are they qualia?). > s. > > They definately exist, whatever that means for a number. http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/C/Chaitins_constant.html as for them being qualia, no reason why they should be any different to computable numbers in thatb respect Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 20:03:42 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:03:42 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:06:47 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > I am simply suggesting that there are personality > differences between individuals that cannot be > explained simply by genetic or environmental > differences. I used twins that live together to > control for genetics and environment. Dominance was > just an example of one such personality trait. There > are many more that differ between identical twins. To > me this demonstrates (albeit in an anecdotal fashion > as I have only ever known 3 pairs of identical twins) > the existense of qualia. Two twins, raised in the same > environment, can recieve the same stimulus yet have > two different experiences. Well, their stimuli and experiences and qualia won't be *exactly* alike even if raised in the same household. But I think I agree... I thought you were suggesting the difference must be due to something other than genetics or experience. >> The pan-vitalism you described to me in the qualia thread is not elan >> vital. In fact I wonder why you consider it vitalism. > > Well it's mostly just semantics. I don't necessarily > believe in elan vital per-se.... Okay, yes it does look like semantics. When I think of elan vital or vitalism, I think of something mystical without which evolution could not have proceeded as it did. But I don't think that is what you mean by it, even if as you say... > a key point that you seem to miss is > that I am proposing that "life began EVERYWHERE at an > earlier time because back then the entire universe had > certain chemical and thermodynamic properties that are > now only found in living organisms" ...which still does not entail anything I would call vitalism. > In regards to the > relationship of classical vitalism to my pan-vitalism > hypothesis, there really isn't one at least not > directly. It was mostly just the language I chose to > use. I could have just as easily called it > panbiogenesis which would probably have been more > accurate but I was inspired by your frequent use of > "pan-psychism" to call it that. I'm glad to have inspired you. :) My use of the term "pan-psychism" is probably misunderstood here by people like Eugen for reasons similar to those that caused me to misunderstand your meaning of pan-vitalism. I agree that your idea is better described as panbiogenesis. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 20:31:56 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:31:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <004a01c5f4f6$969ab2a0$be064e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511282317.jASNHfYl003587@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <004a01c5f4f6$969ab2a0$be064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:06:50 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "Brent Allsop" > >> Phenomenal properties are in addition to the causal properties our cause >> and effect senses can detect. > > So on Monday Wednesday and Friday Phenomenal properties can NOT be > detected by cause and effect and so on those days I suggest you stop > using euphuisms and just call it a soul. I think all Brent is trying to say here that all the objective knowledge of causes and effects in the world (the sum of all possible scientific knowledge) cannot reveal to A what it is like for B to experience qualia. I agree completely. It's going to take some sort mind-meld technology to do that, what Brent calls "effing", and even then it's possible that something will get lost in the translation. -gts From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 20:55:36 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:55:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0511281540q1663241bm@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:40:24 -0500, Emlyn wrote: > On 26/11/05, gts wrote: >> Religion/God/Mysticism/Cartesian-Dualism is one answer to the question >> of qualia, but one that most extropians and transhumanists would >> probably >> prefer to reject. The need for divine intervention would make the >> extropian dream of strong AI enormously more difficult and intimidating. >> How would we persuade or force God to inject souls into our machines? >> > > Oh I don't know. God, if she's out there, has been so careful to be > consistent across the universe, that she's hardly likely to let > something as bleedingly obvious as qualia catch her out. True under pantheism, the doctrine that God is immanent in the world as well as transcendent to it. I'm not here to preach, but if I were then it would be about pantheism. The most famous pantheist was probably Spinoza, and if I remember correctly he was kicked out of his church or temple and labeled an atheist. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 29 21:05:52 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:05:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0511290925o1d725716ya82317a7281b387a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511292106.jATL5w9H026050@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Russell, The only thing "new" about it is the Corelation between what we already know causally about its physics - and the phenomenal properties that it also has which we are consciously aware of. That is why Crick and others call it a "neural correlate". Red certainly isn't new - though the idea that it is something in our brain - rather than something on a surface that reflects 700 nm light may be new for some. It is not "incomputable" in that the information can be abstractly represented or modeled by numbers and so forth - we can make abstract software that acts like we do - claiming it has qualia and such - but we really know it is lying and it must be a much more complex system to enable it to convincingly do such lying. And any abstract representation of a quale is not "like" it unless it is being represented by the original quale. So, in a way, a purely abstract system - like say a system of abstract numbers - cannot adequately represent, or if you must - compute it. Although I would rather define computation to include what our brain does when it represents information with qualia where as a traditional computer does computation with purely abstract representations fundamentally based only on arbitrary causal properties of physics. Does this help? Perhaps you can make an actual stab at some definitions and let's see if I can accept any of them? Brent Allsop _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Russell Wallace Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 10:26 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer On 11/29/05, Brent Allsop wrote: If not Eliezer, is there anyone else that would be willing to take such a bet? I might go for it if you come up with a definition of "qualia" that I can work with (your proposed definition doesn't mean anything at all to me - I couldn't tell you whether I think qualia exist _now_ from it, any more than I could tell you whether a snark is a boojum). Are you relying on new physics for this stuff? If you are, I can come up with a proposed definition. Or are you saying the mind is incomputable a la Penrose? If so, I can come up with a definition based on that. - Russell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 29 21:22:17 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:22:17 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts, Yes, I think we are very much in agreement with our philosophies. But please don't say phenomenal properties are outside of "the sum of all possible scientific knowledge" as this is clearly not true. We can theororise about and do experiments with our own minds and see what quale result and so on. Not to mention what will be possible once we start neural hacking, observing, and effing. This is all very real "GOOD OLD SCIENCE". It's just that phenomenal properties cannot be adequately represented or communicated via abstract system based purely on causal properties. Most traditional science to date only dealt with causal properties - but this is now about to drastically change as we finally start to hack, theorize about and experiment with our phenomenal consciousness. Brent Allsop > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of gts > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:32 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. > > On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:06:50 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > > "Brent Allsop" > > > >> Phenomenal properties are in addition to the causal properties our > cause > >> and effect senses can detect. > > > > So on Monday Wednesday and Friday Phenomenal properties can NOT be > > detected by cause and effect and so on those days I suggest you stop > > using euphuisms and just call it a soul. > > I think all Brent is trying to say here that all the objective knowledge > of causes and effects in the world (the sum of all possible scientific > knowledge) cannot reveal to A what it is like for B to experience qualia. > I agree completely. It's going to take some sort mind-meld technology to > do that, what Brent calls "effing", and even then it's possible that > something will get lost in the translation. > > -gts > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 21:49:46 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:49:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: References: <20051125195719.86861.qmail@web60015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:27:51 -0500, Dirk Bruere wrote: >> I think neurons in the brain experience a color when the light stimulus >> makes an imprint in them. We don't know the exact mechanism, but >> obviously it involves physical changes within or among neurons.In my >> view that physical change *is* awareness. Furthermore I thinkawareness >> happens whenever any physical object is affected by any stimulus. >> >> > If this is so it seems that the interface has got to involve QM. Maybe, maybe not. Being somewhat mysterious, it's tempting to look to QM for the answer to anything else mysterious, as evidenced by the plethora of popular books on the subject that credit QM for all sorts of mysterious things from God to ESP to the appearance of ghosts. But awareness and consciousness might not be so mysterious. The difference between pan-psychism and materialism may only be one of perspective. This is how it seems in my mind, at least. -gts From rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 29 22:31:47 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:31:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051129165531.02de07f8@gmu.edu> At 11:59 AM 11/29/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: >If I defined quale to be a property or piece of information that could not >be adequately described or communicated by abstract communication based only >on the physics of cause and effect? ... >Finally - how is this for a stab at the specification of terms of a bet?: > >I claim that before the end of 2015, you will admit the following: > >1. There are qualia or phenomenal properties (as I've defined above.) > >2. I was blind and stupid not to realize this sooner - and had I only >thought about this more rigorously as many people less intelligent than >myself (such as Brent Allsop) have done I would have noticed what should >have been long ago blatantly obvious. > >3. The discovery of qualia or phenomenal properties (which I once thought >did not exist) which scientific evidence is now showing us do indeed exists >is the most significant scientific discovery made to date and will more >profoundly effect our future than any other thing we've so far discovered. > >If you will agree to pay me $100 if you, in your judgment, admit to all of >these before the end of the year 2015 then I will agree to pay you $100 at >the beginning of 2016 if you have not yet admitted the above and paid me. > >If not Eliezer, is there anyone else that would be willing to take such a >bet? I am willing to accept a similar bet. $100 may not be enough for me to bother to remember the bet and track you down if I win, so how about $1000 or $10,000? But if you are going to accept my judgement regarding whether I win the bet, its seems proper that I should make clear to you my current opinion. We are made of parts which have causal (really correlational) relations with each other. We can probe and understand this stuff by changing some things and seeing how other things vary. By now we have pretty elaborate knowledge of these relations, and can understand a lot but not all of the causal relations between the parts of our brains and the world. That is, we know a lot about how our brains work. We also believe that at least part of the things we are made of are in addition capable of feeling, of having "an inner life." At any one moment one part of our brain feels it has strong reasons for believing this about itself, and we then presume that other parts of our brain now and at other times also have such inner life. We similarly presume that other people whose brains are similarly constructed have similar inner lives. But, probing can only ever really tell us about causal relations, not about inner lives. Since probing is all we will ever have to work with, we will never get any more data about inner lives. And we must accept that these inner lives cannot be the cause of our believing we have inner lives. So all we will only ever have are our naked presumptions. I also think it is rather unlikely that there are specific particles or particle properties that correspond to these inner lives. So we are unlikely to find missing causal inputs into our brains coming from some new "qualitrons." More likely this ability to feel and have an inner life is true of all matter, appropriately arranged. So in a sense I already agree with your #1, and if so can never agree with #2, but disagree pretty substantially with #3. I'm willing to bet against #3 at even odds, and probably at even stronger odds. Nothing interested will be discovered here, though our presumptions may slowly change as beliefs do in philosophy, as a result of realizing the implications of different assumptions. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 22:38:19 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:38:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:17 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > Yes, I think we are very much in agreement with our philosophies. > > But please don't say phenomenal properties are outside of "the sum of all > possible scientific knowledge" as this is clearly not true. I am referring to objective intellectual knowledge, not applied science or technology. > It's just that phenomenal properties cannot be adequately represented or > communicated via abstract system based purely on causal properties. Right, we don't disagree. You've been wrongly criticized for saying these properties are non-causal. What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal properties (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be obtained via abstract science about causes and effects. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Tue Nov 29 23:15:37 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:15:37 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts: > > Yes, I think we are very much in agreement with our philosophies. > > > > But please don't say phenomenal properties are outside of "the sum of > all > > possible scientific knowledge" as this is clearly not true. > > I am referring to objective intellectual knowledge, not applied science or > technology. Hmmmm, then why did you say: "the sum of all possible scientific knowledge"? And once we can share qualia via effing and know reliably and perfectly (well, for all practical purposes anyway) of their causal physical correlates and so on - will this not be considered "objective" knowledge? I like to think so. Subjective is something that can't be shared - isn't it? > > It's just that phenomenal properties cannot be adequately represented or > > communicated via abstract system based purely on causal properties. > > Right, we don't disagree. > > You've been wrongly criticized for saying these properties are non-causal. Yes, and looking back I see some of the things I've said that have lead to this. I hope I've learned my lesson. > What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal properties > (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be obtained via > abstract science about causes and effects. Yes, this is a great way of putting it. I'll have to try to learn from your example and use more of these words in this way more often. Thanks! It's very nice - for a change - not to be the only one really arguing for this position! Brent Allsop From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 23:37:00 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:37:00 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On 11/29/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > > > You've been wrongly criticized for saying these properties are > non-causal. > > Yes, and looking back I see some of the things I've said that have lead to > this. I hope I've learned my lesson. > > > What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal properties > > (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be obtained via > > abstract science about causes and effects. > > Yes, this is a great way of putting it. I'll have to try to learn from > your > example and use more of these words in this way more often. > > Thanks! It's very nice - for a change - not to be the only one really > arguing for this position! > Actually, one might consider Free Will (if it exists) to be non causal if there are feedback loops from the future. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 23:48:42 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:18:42 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanowrimo, is anyone else here going to make it? Message-ID: <710b78fc0511291548g73e2a82dt@mail.gmail.com> I'm actually going to get there! Woo hoo! Did anyone else give it a go? Did you make it to the finish line? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 49931 (http://nanowrimo.org) From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 23:54:36 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:54:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:15:37 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: >> What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal properties >> (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be obtained via >> abstract science about causes and effects. > > Yes, this is a great way of putting it. I'll have to try to learn from > your example and use more of these words in this way more often. > > Thanks! You're welcome! > It's very nice - for a change - not to be the only one really > arguing for this position! Consider the consequences. We might be burned at the stake. :) One consequence, especially if your "effing" idea works out as you hope, is that people might be forced to concede that the seemingly dualistic nature of objective vs subjective reality for humans is not unique to humans but is true for all things in the world, living or dead. This is not an idea foreign to philosophy, but true "effing" would make it a scientific fact. As you say: > And once we can share qualia via effing and know reliably and perfectly > (well, for all practical purposes anyway) of their causal physical > correlates and so on - will this not be considered "objective" > knowledge? I > like to think so. Yep, that's subjective knowledge becoming objective knowledge. -gts From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 30 00:29:52 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:29:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20051129165531.02de07f8@gmu.edu> Message-ID: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Robin, > So in a sense I already agree with your #1 Awwwrrrr! So we are basically in the same camp then! You agree that qualia do exist! The other two were mostly just added in for fun and vanity. Thank you for not taking advantage of me and my vanity! The only difference is I don't like your terminology and some of its implications. A "probe"? Surely we can causally observe things without a "probe" can't we. Magnetic Resonance Imaging doesn't use a "probe" does it? You wouldn't consider light a probe would you? That is why I use the much more versatile and encompassing: "Any Causal observation". What the heck is the term "inner life" supposed to mean? What is it constructed of, what is it like, and so on? What does an "inner life" have to do with what red is like and how it is different than green and warm? And the way you describe it makes it sound like it is impervious to scientific investigation, hacking, enhancing, and all that critically important fun stuff. So are you also saying there will never be anything like effing or sharing of anything to do with such an "inner life"? Actually - this is a real good thing! The more people that are agreed the better. That is if we are right and qualia really do exist - right? So Eliezer, or anyone else not in the qualia camp - do you want to take my bet? If you are not against us - then you are for us right! ;) Brent Allsop > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Robin Hanson > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 3:32 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer > > At 11:59 AM 11/29/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: > >If I defined quale to be a property or piece of information that could > not > >be adequately described or communicated by abstract communication based > only > >on the physics of cause and effect? ... > >Finally - how is this for a stab at the specification of terms of a bet?: > > > >I claim that before the end of 2015, you will admit the following: > > > >1. There are qualia or phenomenal properties (as I've defined above.) > > > >2. I was blind and stupid not to realize this sooner - and had I only > >thought about this more rigorously as many people less intelligent than > >myself (such as Brent Allsop) have done I would have noticed what should > >have been long ago blatantly obvious. > > > >3. The discovery of qualia or phenomenal properties (which I once thought > >did not exist) which scientific evidence is now showing us do indeed > exists > >is the most significant scientific discovery made to date and will more > >profoundly effect our future than any other thing we've so far > discovered. > > > >If you will agree to pay me $100 if you, in your judgment, admit to all > of > >these before the end of the year 2015 then I will agree to pay you $100 > at > >the beginning of 2016 if you have not yet admitted the above and paid me. > > > >If not Eliezer, is there anyone else that would be willing to take such a > >bet? > > I am willing to accept a similar bet. $100 may not be enough for me to > bother > to remember the bet and track you down if I win, so how about $1000 or > $10,000? > > But if you are going to accept my judgement regarding whether I win the > bet, > its seems proper that I should make clear to you my current opinion. > > We are made of parts which have causal (really correlational) relations > with > each other. We can probe and understand this stuff by changing some > things > and seeing how other things vary. By now we have pretty elaborate > knowledge > of these relations, and can understand a lot but not all of the > causal relations > between the parts of our brains and the world. That is, we know a lot > about > how our brains work. > > We also believe that at least part of the things we are made of are in > addition > capable of feeling, of having "an inner life." At any one moment one part > of > our brain feels it has strong reasons for believing this about itself, and > we > then presume that other parts of our brain now and at other times > also have such > inner life. We similarly presume that other people whose brains are > similarly > constructed have similar inner lives. > > But, probing can only ever really tell us about causal relations, not > about > inner lives. Since probing is all we will ever have to work with, we > will never > get any more data about inner lives. And we must accept that these > inner lives > cannot be the cause of our believing we have inner lives. So all we will > only > ever have are our naked presumptions. > > I also think it is rather unlikely that there are specific particles > or particle > properties that correspond to these inner lives. So we are unlikely to > find > missing causal inputs into our brains coming from some new "qualitrons." > More > likely this ability to feel and have an inner life is true of all matter, > appropriately arranged. > > So in a sense I already agree with your #1, and if so can never agree with > #2, > but disagree pretty substantially with #3. I'm willing to bet against #3 > at > even odds, and probably at even stronger odds. Nothing interested will be > discovered here, though our presumptions may slowly change as beliefs do > in > philosophy, as a result of realizing the implications of different > assumptions. > > > > Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu > Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University > MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 > 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 30 00:34:14 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:34:14 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511300034.jAU0YOu7009349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts: > Consider the consequences. We might be burned at the stake. :) What? You haven't been burned at the stake yet? Brent Allsop From russell.wallace at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 00:53:08 2005 From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:53:08 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511292106.jATL5w9H026050@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <8d71341e0511290925o1d725716ya82317a7281b387a@mail.gmail.com> <200511292106.jATL5w9H026050@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <8d71341e0511291653l64813c72o27cd0e3b60d1820f@mail.gmail.com> On 11/29/05, Brent Allsop wrote: > > Does this help? > I'm afraid you could be quoting Hindu scripture in its original language for all my ability to attach a truth value to any of it. I'll try one more shot: Are you claiming a human uploaded to a purely digital computer (equivalent to some Turing machine) would _not_ have qualia, and/or would not be conscious? If you are, I'll take the bet. If not, I've no idea, though feel free to try other definitions on me. - Russell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diegocaleiro at terra.com.br Wed Nov 30 01:04:17 2005 From: diegocaleiro at terra.com.br (Diego Caleiro) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:04:17 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gravity was qualia bet Message-ID: <200511292304.17480.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Actually, what we call matter is a given set of properties, and there is no possible philosophical evidence that there is any "substantial, essential" thing that must "have" this properties.... Just like "I think there fore I am" is wrong because it pressuposes that a thought must have a thinker, thinking of gravity as a non phisical property is wrong because we don't know, and never will know if there is indeed a "substantial, essential" thing that has phisical properties. Or if "matter" is only an intuitive intentionality we have atributted to the properties we see in the world. There is no way to say that there is a matter to have the properties we see, only to say that the properties are there. Gravity is there also, so it is not different significantly ( in a dualist sense) from matter. Gravity does not pressupose mysticism. Hence Newton arrived at the view that the planets are attracted to the sun by a force, which is called gravitation. This whole point of view, as we have seen, is superseded by relativity. There are no longer such things as 'straight lines' in the old geometrical sense. There are 'straightest lines', or geodesies, but these involve time as well as space. A light-ray passing through the solar system does not describe the same orbit as a comet, from a geometrical point of view; nevertheless each moves in a geodesic. The whole imaginative picture is changed. A poet might say that water runs downhill because it is attracted to the sea, but a physicist or an ordinary mortal would say that it moves as it does, at each point, because of the nature of the ground at that point, without regard to what lies ahead of it. Just as the sea does not cause the water to run towards it, so the sun does not cause the planets to move round it. The planets move round the sun because that is the easiest thing to do - in the technical sense of'least action'. It is the easiest thing to do because of the nature of the region in which they are, not because of an influence emanating from the sun. The supposed necessity of attributing gravitation to a 'force' attracting the planets towards the sun has arisen from the determination to preserve Euclidean geometry at all costs. If we suppose that our space is Euclidean, when in fact it is not, we shall have to call in physics to rectify the errors of our geometry. We shall find bodies not moving in what we insist upon regarding as straight lines, and we shall demand a cause for this behaviour. Eddington stated this matter with admirable lucidity, and the following explanation is based on one given by him: Suppose that you assume the formula for interval which is used in the special theory of relativity - a formula which implies that your space is Euclidean. Since intervals can be compared by experimental methods, you will soon discover that your formula cannot be reconciled with the results of observation, and realise your The Abolition of 'Force' 135 mistake. If you insist on adhering to the Euclidean formula notwithstanding, then you will have to attribute the discrepancy between formula and observations to some influence which is present and which affects the behaviour of test bodies. You will introduce an additional agency to which you can attribute the consequences of your mistake. The name given to any agency which causes deviation from uniform motion in a straight line is force according to the Newtonian definition of force. Hence the agency invoked through your insistence on the Euclidean formula for interval is described as a 'field of force'. From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 30 01:06:43 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:06:43 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] qualia In-Reply-To: <200511291556.jATFuJpE001997@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511291556.jATFuJpE001997@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <0739FB9F-D361-43A3-B5FD-991A9633122D@mac.com> As software (effectively) does do this in our brains, I doubt I am mistaken. - samantha On Nov 29, 2005, at 7:56 AM, Brent Allsop wrote: > > Samantha, > > >> SIGH. This is pointless. A self-aware software demo should end this >> fruitless thread. >> >> - Samantha >> > > It is pointless - but you are still the one mistaken and therefore > the one > at fault or the one that must change so this will no longer be > pointless. > > I bet you experiencing a color quale you have never experienced > before would > make you say something like: "Boy -what I was saying about software > alone > being able to do this was very stupid of me. That software program > might > claim to know what this new color is like - but it is obviously > lying." > Don't you think? Are you saying something like this will never > happen? > > Brent Allsop > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From diegocaleiro at terra.com.br Wed Nov 30 01:14:51 2005 From: diegocaleiro at terra.com.br (Diego Caleiro) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:14:51 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? Message-ID: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Is there anyone who has written a book that explains at least these questions What is the big bang, What is matter How evolution works multiverse theories Quantum phisics How animals behave Neural correlates of conciousness ? From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 30 01:19:41 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:19:41 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 29, 2005, at 11:06 AM, The Avantguardian wrote: > I am simply suggesting that there are personality > differences between individuals that cannot be > explained simply by genetic or environmental > differences. I used twins that live together to > control for genetics and environment. Dominance was > just an example of one such personality trait. There > are many more that differ between identical twins. To > me this demonstrates (albeit in an anecdotal fashion > as I have only ever known 3 pairs of identical twins) > the existense of qualia. Two twins, raised in the same > environment, can recieve the same stimulus yet have > two different experiences. > Then does "qualia" substitute for what is probably due to different internal experience as we can't explain the observed difference by studying externals? Are all such things "qualia" in your thinking? I would think a bit of chaos theory would go a considerable ways to explaining such differences. Before even pulling that out of the toolkit it impossible for even the brains of identical twins to be identically wired at birth much less to give them both identical experiences. > > > >> Also I wonder why you are defending elan vital. >> > > Probably because somebody worthy of disagreeing with > is attacking it. ;) Plus it truly hasn't been > disproven, it has only lost popularity. Trouble is that it never got any proof and increasingly became an unnecessary hypothesis. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 30 01:28:39 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:28:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: References: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <4EE60EF9-0DBD-41FA-8AE4-EB0204AFFFEE@mac.com> On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:38 PM, gts wrote: > On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:17 -0500, Brent Allsop > wrote: > > > >> Yes, I think we are very much in agreement with our philosophies. >> >> But please don't say phenomenal properties are outside of "the sum >> of all >> possible scientific knowledge" as this is clearly not true. >> > > I am referring to objective intellectual knowledge, not applied > science or technology. huh? Please clarify the distinction you are attempting to make. > > >> It's just that phenomenal properties cannot be adequately >> represented or >> communicated via abstract system based purely on causal properties. >> > > Right, we don't disagree. > > You've been wrongly criticized for saying these properties are non- > causal. What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal > properties (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be > obtained via abstract science about causes and effects. > If so then the discussion is silly. I can't describe love by an abstract discussion of causes and effects. So what? That doesn't make being able to experience such in any way outside science or causality or proof of some other way of knowing or some argument for metaphysical duality. - samantha From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 02:24:12 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:24:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:29:52 -0500, Brent Allsop wrote: > What the heck is the term "inner life" supposed to mean? What is it > constructed of, what is it like, and so on? What does an "inner life" > have to do with what red is like and how it is different than green and > warm? For now we could define "inner life" as "life without effing". The idea has meaning at least until effing becomes possible. I'm not sure true effing technology can ever be possible even in principle, (still thinking about that one), but if it ever happens then there will be no clear distinction between inner and outer life. I look forward to enjoying your cake and ice cream without fear of putting on weight. I'll even let you taste mine. But I'm going to turn off that damned machine when I'm alone with a woman. :) -gts From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Nov 29 15:41:21 2005 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 09:41:21 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Book Prize: ROBOTS Book Receives Award (Prix) Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20051129085248.02fd9360@pop-server.austin.rr.com> 2005 Livre Prix - ROBOTS French author Daniel Ichbiah has received the French 2005 Prix for Robots, his recent book on technology and the future. This is timely for all of us because the book focuses on the evolution of technology and the coalescences of humanity and technology while illustrating the many benefits of dynamic technology. The final chapter of the book titled "Les Robots du Futur" covers technology and the future of the human body. This chapter also features my design "Primo Posthuman" http://www.natasha.cc/primo.htm in a full four-page spread of images and my ideas about the challenges of the future, society's ability to adapt to the massive changes ahead, transhumans and posthumans, and the history and future of transhumanism. Also covered in this chapter are nanorobots, and the works of Takao Someya of Japan, Frederic Kaplan of Sony in Paris, Dr. Haipeng Xie of the University of Guelph, Dr. Hod Lipson of Cornell University, and Prof. Kevin Warwick of the University of Reading. Robots is a truly visionary and well written expose of the emergence of technology and robotics. http://ichbiah.online.fr/pagerobots.htm http://www.techno-science.net/?onglet=ouvrages&ID=2830707893 Natasha Vita-More Cultural Strategist - Designer Future Studies MS Program, University of Houston President, Extropy Institute Member, Association of Professional Futurists Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Honorary Vice-Chair, World Transhumanist Association Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Advisor, Alcor Life Extension Foundation If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. Buckminster Fuller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 03:35:53 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:35:53 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? In-Reply-To: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> References: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >Is there anyone who has written a book that explains at least these questions > > >What is the big bang, > >What is matter > >How evolution works > >multiverse theories > >Quantum phisics > >How animals behave > >Neural correlates of conciousness why do you need "a book" when you have google? why do you need "a book" when you can have 7 dedicated books? Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 03:39:02 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:39:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: References: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213747.01d44b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:24 PM 11/29/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >But I'm going to turn off that >damned machine when I'm alone with a woman. :) Turn off the effing when you're effing? I *knew* I'd find a contradiction in your argument eventually. Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 30 03:39:21 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:39:21 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> ________________________________________ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere Subject: Re: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) On 11/29/05, Herb Martin wrote: To Spike and Dirk: ? Spike wrote (earlier): > > recreationals, but not to LSD.? The 60s are over, it was bad >> medicine then, still is now.? Put that stuff away, too dangerous. ? Dirk wrote: > I disagree. > IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. > I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - and this certainly includes alcohol. What dangers? The danger I had in mind is accidental overdose. With alcohol it is possible to get a fatal overdose but it isn't common, same with marijuana. I haven't heard of anyone overdosing on cocaine or the other opiates: when one gets enough of that stuff one gets dozy I would suppose, perhaps get too stoned to strike a match. But with heroine and LSD, accidental overdose happens, people die. It takes so little LSD to trip out permanently, 12 milligrams = dead. A hundred micrograms the normal dosage: If you buy it in the liquid form, do you trust some stoner to have measured the dosage correctly? How do you control for impurities? Dirk do you really think that process isn't dangerous as all hell? That being said, I am one who believes that most recreational drugs should be legal. But I want to make like Dick Nixon and make one thing perfectly clear: my attitude is not the same as saying that I believe people should use them. I think most people should leave them alone. Making them illegal introduces new dangers: the dosages are controlled by dope dealers and stoners instead of pharmacists, which invites overdosage, and of course introduces the danger of prison. spike From mail at harveynewstrom.com Wed Nov 30 03:50:53 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:50:53 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051129190647.96834.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:06 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > I am simply suggesting that there are personality > differences between individuals that cannot be > explained simply by genetic or environmental > differences. I used twins that live together to > control for genetics and environment. Dominance was > just an example of one such personality trait. There > are many more that differ between identical twins. To > me this demonstrates (albeit in an anecdotal fashion > as I have only ever known 3 pairs of identical twins) > the existense of qualia. Two twins, raised in the same > environment, can recieve the same stimulus yet have > two different experiences. "Identical" twins cannot receive the exact same stimulus or environment. Not all conversations are directed simultaneously to both twins. Not all e-mails are sent to both twins. Even at birth, one twin weighs more than the other. The fact is, even identical objects or people are not in the exact same place at the same time, and can never experience the exact same environment. Over time, twins differ. In fact, I don't see how twin have any more similar environment than any non-twin siblings. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 30 03:51:30 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:51:30 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 7:39 PM > To: 'ExI chat list' > Subject: RE: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) > > > > ________________________________________ > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere > Subject: Re: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) > > > On 11/29/05, Herb Martin wrote: > To Spike and Dirk: > > Spike wrote (earlier): > > > recreationals, but not to LSD.? The 60s are over, it was bad > >> medicine then, still is now.? Put that stuff away, too dangerous. > > Dirk wrote: > > I disagree. > > IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. > > I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - > and > this certainly includes alcohol. > > What dangers? > > > > The danger I had in mind is accidental overdose... > > spike I googled and found that the risk is not of dying with an accidental LSD overdose but rather merely psychosis. OK crazy is better than dead I suppose. spike From mail at harveynewstrom.com Wed Nov 30 03:55:23 2005 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:55:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <269a972bddb2b5b4fbd6ed1c87c6f247@HarveyNewstrom.com> On Nov 29, 2005, at 11:59 AM, Brent Allsop wrote: > If I defined quale to be a property or piece of information that could > not > be adequately described or communicated by abstract communication > based only > on the physics of cause and effect? Then would you say that qualia - > as > I've defined it here, do not exist? This is not a definition. You describe what properties the quale lacks (the ability to be adequately described or communicated by abstract communications based only on the physics of cause and effect). You don't define any qualities for the quale. The fact that it cannot be communicated must be due to some proposed property of the quale. Yet this definition does not attempt to describe it. In other words, you are describing attribute or lacks of attributes, but you are not giving a definition. This also is untestable, because it is impossible to prove something can't be done. Instead of proving that something is a quale based on a definition you have given, you are setting yourself up to have to prove something cannot be communicated due to a lack of some undefined thing it doesn't have. This will be very hard to prove, much less quantify or even describe. -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 04:02:40 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:02:40 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213747.01d44b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213747.01d44b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:39:02 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:24 PM 11/29/2005 -0500, gts wrote: > >> But I'm going to turn off that >> damned machine when I'm alone with a woman. :) > > Turn off the effing when you're effing? I *knew* I'd find a > contradiction in your argument eventually. That second meaning is what I came up with I did a google search on "effing". (Brent, where did your meaning come from?) What would happen when if a couple effed while they effed? What an embarrassing question. Forget I asked that. :) -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 04:25:16 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:25:16 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: References: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213747.01d44b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129222401.01e56be0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:02 PM 11/29/2005 -0500, gts wrote: >What would happen when if a couple effed while they effed? Reckon they'd be effed, matey. Crocodile Broderick From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 04:26:55 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:26:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <269a972bddb2b5b4fbd6ed1c87c6f247@HarveyNewstrom.com> References: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <269a972bddb2b5b4fbd6ed1c87c6f247@HarveyNewstrom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:55:23 -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2005, at 11:59 AM, Brent Allsop wrote: > >> If I defined quale to be a property or piece of information that could >> not be adequately described or communicated by abstract communication >> based only on the physics of cause and effect? Then would you say that >> qualia - as >> I've defined it here, do not exist? > > This is not a definition. You describe what properties the quale lacks > (the ability to be adequately described or communicated by abstract > communications based only on the physics of cause and effect). You > don't define any qualities for the quale. The fact that it cannot be > communicated must be due to some proposed property of the quale. Yet > this definition does not attempt to describe it. > > In other words, you are describing attribute or lacks of attributes, but > you are not giving a definition. I think Brent is making a distinction, correctly imo, between phenomenal information or knowledge and intellectual or abstract information or knowledge. (I prefer the word "knowledge" over "information" here but the difference in meanings is not critical.) The fact that he cannot give a positive definition of phenomenal information is due to the fact that definitions are intellectual and abstract. Qualia are not. They are the content of immediate sense experience, and are present in the mind before the mind forms abstractions and definitions about them. The purple quale is "what it is like" for you to see purple. We can talk about the neuroscience of seeing purple, but the experience itself defies any attempt at definition or communication, and will until Brent's vision of effable qualia comes true. Qualia are ineffable (ah, that's where the word "effing" came from). -gts From diegocaleiro at terra.com.br Wed Nov 30 04:58:03 2005 From: diegocaleiro at terra.com.br (Diego Caleiro) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 02:58:03 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200511300258.03636.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Mainly I need a book that makes al this things to be bended togheter on one's mind. The point would be a book that is consistent, and have internal dialogue. Such a book would bring a logically connected, internally coherent sistem of thinking, that would be, intuitively, a good guide for thinking about new things, making analogies, and etc... But, some people, such as you probably, can trace all the path to analogies and internal coherence within your mind, so why should someone make the job easier for smaller mortals.... Diego Em Quarta 30 Novembro 2005 01:35, Damien Broderick escreveu: > >Is there anyone who has written a book that explains at least these > > questions > > > > > >What is the big bang, > > > >What is matter > > > >How evolution works > > > >multiverse theories > > > >Quantum phisics > > > >How animals behave > > > >Neural correlates of conciousness > > why do you need "a book" when you have google? > > why do you need "a book" when you can have 7 dedicated books? > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra. > Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite > http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=diegocaleiro&_ >l=1,1133321784.937925.1009.cabue.terra.com.br,3154,Des15,Des15 > > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. > Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 29/11/2005 / Vers?o: > 4.4.00/4639 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 04:53:07 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:53:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <4EE60EF9-0DBD-41FA-8AE4-EB0204AFFFEE@mac.com> References: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <4EE60EF9-0DBD-41FA-8AE4-EB0204AFFFEE@mac.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 20:28:39 -0500, Samantha Atkins wrote: > I can't describe love by an abstract discussion of causes and effects. Neither can I. > So what? So love is a quale. Like all qualia, nobody understands it. -gts From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 05:31:03 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 16:01:03 +1030 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> References: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511292131j787ff60aq@mail.gmail.com> On 30/11/05, spike wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike > > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 7:39 PM > > To: 'ExI chat list' > > Subject: RE: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Bruere > > Subject: Re: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) > > > > > > On 11/29/05, Herb Martin wrote: > > To Spike and Dirk: > > > > Spike wrote (earlier): > > > > recreationals, but not to LSD. The 60s are over, it was bad > > >> medicine then, still is now. Put that stuff away, too dangerous. > > > > Dirk wrote: > > > I disagree. > > > IMO the benefits far outweigh the possible dangers. > > > I'd also say that when it comes to damage most other drugs are worse - > > and > > this certainly includes alcohol. > > > > What dangers? > > > > > > > > The danger I had in mind is accidental overdose... > > > > spike > > > I googled and found that the risk is not of > dying with an accidental LSD overdose but > rather merely psychosis. OK crazy is better > than dead I suppose. > > spike > I'll chime in with the other supporters of LSD... you can't put the hallucinogens in a group with the other illegal drugs. LSD and mushrooms can change break your existing worldview. Something not altogether a bad thing from an extropian standpoint I reckon, because you can then go about reconstructing using a more rational framework, rather than just inheriting it from Newton knows where. But in my experience these aren't things you mess with very often, simply because the experience is too intense. They seemed to me to be the opposite of addictive (unless you have a serious love of chaos). Marijuana is something I've always thought had no serious side effects (my parents were hippies, you know), but I've seen as I get older that people really do become dependent on it, in a psychological rather than purely physiological fashion I think. And the bad thing from an extro point of view is that it seems to make people really apathetic, so that they stop doing anything except scoring and getting stoned. Blah to that! As for alcohol, well I come from a family of alcohol dependants. My mother, who took every drug that you can name, I'd reckon, with extensive habits around anything addictive at one time or another (including all the big ones), managed to kick everything except alcohol. She died about almost 2 months ago, aged 55, of a hemorrhagic stroke (doctors on the list will know the risk factors here, or google it) after being warned for years to stop drinking or die. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 50000+! Winner! (http://nanowrimo.org) From outlawpoet at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 05:36:03 2005 From: outlawpoet at gmail.com (justin corwin) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:36:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanowrimo, is anyone else here going to make it? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511291548g73e2a82dt@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0511291548g73e2a82dt@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3ad827f30511292136kd26c36bnae360ab3eb769391@mail.gmail.com> I'm 60k+, but in getting this far, I've noticed that the novel is horribly incomplete and needs more work. I also noticed that I ended up not interacting with the other nanowrimo people at all. I should upload my novel for word count, but I haven't even been to the website since early november. On 11/29/05, Emlyn wrote: > I'm actually going to get there! Woo hoo! > > Did anyone else give it a go? Did you make it to the finish line? -- Justin Corwin outlawpoet at hell.com http://outlawpoet.blogspot.com http://www.adaptiveai.com From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 05:37:37 2005 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:37:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051130053737.69705.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Then does "qualia" substitute for what is probably > due to different > internal experience as we can't explain the observed > difference by > studying externals? >Are all such things "qualia" > in your > thinking? Well I am admittedly out of my depth discussing qualia but based upon the thought experiment posted earlier about Mary the sensory deprived "color scientist", I guess that is how I interpretated "qualia". To be honest though, anything that truly has no external measure is not amenable to scientific explanation and must be relegated to the philosophers. Of course there might be a yet unknown external measure of qualia. Perhaps something like the Voigt-Kampff test from Phillip K. Dick's D.A.D.O.E.S. aka "Blade Runner". There is some folklore that contends that the pupils of people viewing something that interests them dilate and conversely their pupils contract when they view something that they don't like. Perhaps this might be a way of quantitating qualia. If a person's pupils dilate when they see red, they like red. If a person's pupils contract, they don't. Problem is it seems that most people's pupils dilate when they see red so it must be a pretty popular color. Of course this might be a mere hold-over from our hunter-gatherer days when red meant a tasty fruit and have nothing to do with a person's actual color preference. I would be interested in comparing homosexuals and hetersexuals in this way using a pupilometer and pictures of scantily clad specimens of both sexes. But alas, this is not something that I am at leisure to pursue currently. > I would think a bit of chaos theory > would go a > considerable ways to explaining such differences. > Before even > pulling that out of the toolkit it impossible for > even the brains of > identical twins to be identically wired at birth > much less to give > them both identical experiences. You are most likely correct on this. > >> Also I wonder why you are defending elan vital. > >> > > > > Probably because somebody worthy of disagreeing > with > > is attacking it. ;) Plus it truly hasn't been > > disproven, it has only lost popularity. > > Trouble is that it never got any proof and > increasingly became an > unnecessary hypothesis. I hate to dredge up old unpopular references but I still am intrigued by MacDougal's "soul weight" experiment aka "21 grams". I mean sure most people DON'T take it seriously, but he WAS a medical doctor and therefore not necessarily an idiot. To call him a fraud without having actually met the man could be unfair, to say the least, since he is dead and can't defend either his research or his character. I would sincerely like to see such an experiment repeated with the more sensitive balances afforded by modern technology. Better yet I would like to die in the detection chamber of CERN or one of the other particle accelerators (when my time came of course). This would be a superb way to test if there is any form of measurable energy representing consciousness released from the body at the moment of death. Of course being dead, I would probably never know the results but I don't think there would be a lot of other volunteers for this sort of thing. The Avantguardian is Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "If you fear death, you are not living right; if you don't want to live forever, you are not living well." - a sparrow outside my window. __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Nov 30 05:48:25 2005 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:48:25 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <007e01c5f571$b0ab67e0$74550318@ZANDRA2> Howard Stern claimed on his show on more than one occasion to have taken 4 hits of acid at once in college and had to be babysat by his friends for two days before coming down. He kind of got real serious when he talked about it like he could remember how intense it was. Maybe it didn't make him who he is today but he does seem to approach life with a nothing can hurt me now attitude. When I search on LSD and psychosis the literature cautioned that it was hard to determine whether those affected had preexisting mental problems. Treatment was described as not requiring other medication and most patients just needed calmed down. All in all it doesn't sound any worse than the violent episodes brought on by large amounts of alcohol. >>I googled and found that the risk is not of dying with an accidental LSD overdose but rather merely psychosis. OK crazy >>is better than dead I suppose. From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 30 06:05:33 2005 From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:05:33 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511292131j787ff60aq@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200511300607.jAU67pe06229@tick.javien.com> Emlyn so sorry to hear of your mother's passing. spike ... > alcohol. She died about almost 2 months ago, aged 55, of a hemorrhagic > stroke (doctors on the list will know the risk factors here, or google > it) after being warned for years to stop drinking or die. > > -- > Emlyn From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 06:25:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 01:25:00 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051130053737.69705.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051130053737.69705.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:37:37 -0500, The Avantguardian wrote: > To be honest though, anything that truly has no external > measure [like qualia] is not amenable to scientific explanation and > must be relegated to the philosophers. This seems true to me, and explains why I find Brent's idea so interesting. At the moment the idea of qualia seems like just another untestable idea for philosophers to talk about in their ivory towers. However if we consider effing technology feasible then we have to agree that qualia will someday become amenable to something like scientific explanation. > Of course there might be a yet unknown external measure of qualia... > There is some folklore that contends that the pupils > of people viewing something that interests them dilate... Still just objective science. I can infer that you experience the heat qualia when you pull your hand away from my blowtorch. But still I will have no knowledge of your experiential knowledge of that heat. For all I really know, intense heat feels to you like intense cold feels to me. > I hate to dredge up old unpopular references but I > still am intrigued by MacDougal's "soul weight" > experiment aka "21 grams". I think one can say consiousness has mass, but that the mass of consiousness must be exactly equal to the mass of the matter in the brain required to reflect on experience. Tiny brains with little mass probably don't have that mass or that ability. Larger more massive brains like ours have it. Might be about 21 grams worth of mass. When it happened, mother nature got a blackjack. :) -gts From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 07:05:13 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:35:13 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanowrimo, is anyone else here going to make it? In-Reply-To: <3ad827f30511292136kd26c36bnae360ab3eb769391@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0511291548g73e2a82dt@mail.gmail.com> <3ad827f30511292136kd26c36bnae360ab3eb769391@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511292305m759ff52ag@mail.gmail.com> I didn't interact either, very much. FAR too busy trying to write my also incomplete novel. But I just wrapped it up at a climactic point and put the rest down to "book 2". -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 50000+! Winner! (http://nanowrimo.org) On 30/11/05, justin corwin wrote: > I'm 60k+, but in getting this far, I've noticed that the novel is > horribly incomplete and needs more work. > > I also noticed that I ended up not interacting with the other > nanowrimo people at all. I should upload my novel for word count, but > I haven't even been to the website since early november. > > > On 11/29/05, Emlyn wrote: > > I'm actually going to get there! Woo hoo! > > > > Did anyone else give it a go? Did you make it to the finish line? > > > -- > Justin Corwin > outlawpoet at hell.com > http://outlawpoet.blogspot.com > http://www.adaptiveai.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 30 07:32:13 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 08:32:13 +0100 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <007e01c5f571$b0ab67e0$74550318@ZANDRA2> References: <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> <007e01c5f571$b0ab67e0$74550318@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <20051130073213.GQ2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:48:25AM -0500, Gary Miller wrote: > Howard Stern claimed on his show on more than one occasion to have taken 4 > hits of acid at once in college and had to be babysat by his friends for two > days before coming down. He kind of got real serious when he talked about > it like he could remember how intense it was. I'm not sure why people suggest tripping hard will produce new insights. It's just entertainment on steroids. It doesn't have to be more dangerous than your other activities, if properly risk-managed. But God in a bottle it's not. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 10:25:50 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:25:50 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/30/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > > why do you need "a book" when you have google? > why do you need "a book" when you can have 7 dedicated books? > The problem with google is that if you search on, say, "big bang theory" you get around 5 million hits, including much junk, with many sites telling you that the big bang theory is wrong. Evolution gets over 200 million hits with much junk about the "so-called" evolution controversy. I would suggest you start with some sort of science encyclopedia. Try your local library. :) As a start online, you can use and search for the items you are interested in. Their articles are usually pretty good, though some controversial articles have been badly damaged. seems ok. Also Best wishes, BillK From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 10:57:08 2005 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:57:08 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051129222401.01e56be0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213747.01d44b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129222401.01e56be0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 11/30/05, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 11:02 PM 11/29/2005 -0500, gts wrote: > > >What would happen when if a couple effed while they effed? > > Reckon they'd be effed, matey. > I reckon it would be a big shock for the woman to realize that the man's brain was busy multiplying numbers and trying desperately to think about anything except sex, so that he can last longer than a minute or two. It would be a similar shock to the man to realize that the woman's brain was busy planning the evening meal and thinking about the red shoes she saw yesterday. :) BillK From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 30 11:05:17 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:05:17 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bayesian Surprise Attracts Human Attention Message-ID: http://ilab.usc.edu/publications/Itti_Baldi06nips.html L. Itti, P. Baldi, Bayesian Surprise Attracts Human Attention, In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 19 (NIPS*2005), pp. 1-8, Cambridge, MA:MIT Press, 2006. Abstract: The concept of surprise is central to sensory processing, adaptation, learning, and attention. Yet, no widely-accepted mathematical theory currently exists to quantitatively characterize surprise elicited by a stimulus or event, for observers that range from single neurons to complex natural or engineered systems. We describe a formal Bayesian definition of surprise that is the only consistent formulation under minimal axiomatic assumptions. Surprise quantifies how data affects a natural or artificial observer, by measuring the difference between posterior and prior beliefs of the observer. Using this framework we measure the extent to which humans direct their gaze towards surprising items while watching television and video games. We find that subjects are strongly attracted towards surprising locations, with 72 percent of all human gaze shifts directed towards locations more surprising than the average, a figure which rises to 84 percent when considering only gaze targets simultaneously selected by all subjects. The resulting theory of surprise is applicable across different spatio-temporal scales, modalities, and levels of abstraction. Themes: Bayesian Theory of Surprise, Computational Modeling, Model of Bottom-Up Saliency-Based Visual Attention, Model of Top-Down Attentional Modulation, Human Eye-Tracking Research -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "Why speculate when you can calculate?" ---John Baez From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 30 11:36:23 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:36:23 +0100 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) Message-ID: How about looking at research and papers? As Alexander Shulgin says: "Be Informed, Then Choose." MAPS = Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies http://www.maps.org/ Their bibliography of research papers are here: MAPS: Psychologic research with MDMA, MDE, LSD, Ayahuasca, Ibogaine, Ketamine, DMT, Psilocybin, Peyote, Savia http://www.maps.org/research/ Amara From dirk.bruere at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 11:57:40 2005 From: dirk.bruere at gmail.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:57:40 +0000 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <20051130073213.GQ2249@leitl.org> References: <200511300353.jAU3rEe18888@tick.javien.com> <007e01c5f571$b0ab67e0$74550318@ZANDRA2> <20051130073213.GQ2249@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11/30/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:48:25AM -0500, Gary Miller wrote: > > > Howard Stern claimed on his show on more than one occasion to have taken > 4 > > hits of acid at once in college and had to be babysat by his friends for > two > > days before coming down. He kind of got real serious when he talked > about > > it like he could remember how intense it was. > > I'm not sure why people suggest tripping hard will produce new insights. > It's just entertainment on steroids. It doesn't have to be more dangerous > than your other activities, if properly risk-managed. But God in a bottle > it's not. > > That sounds like something someone who had never taken LSD would say... Anyway, to answer another post about toxicity. 12mg may or may not be fatal, but it is over 1000x the qty needed for a trip (50ug). As a drug it has one of the highest therapeutic indexes. Name anything else where you need to take 1000 times the effective dose in order to kill yourself. How about water? salt? and don't even think of aspirin. Dirk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Wed Nov 30 14:09:54 2005 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:09:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051129165531.02de07f8@gmu.edu> <200511300030.jAU0U2u7009033@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20051130090201.02ee2888@gmu.edu> At 07:29 PM 11/29/2005, Brent Allsop wrote: > > So in a sense I already agree with your #1 > >Awwwrrrr! So we are basically in the same camp then! You agree that qualia >do exist! The other two were mostly just added in for fun and vanity. >Thank you for not taking advantage of me and my vanity! >The only difference is I don't like your terminology and some of its >implications. You offered to bet for a conjunction of three claims, #1, at even odds. I offer to bet against #3 at even odds. Since a conjunction must be no more likely than its components, this should be to your advantage. Your #3 was the most objectively verifiable claim, and to my mind the most central to your claim that a grand new scientific and technical revolution is upon us. To quote: >3. The discovery of qualia or phenomenal properties (which I once thought >did not exist) which scientific evidence is now showing us do indeed exists >is the most significant scientific discovery made to date and will more >profoundly effect our future than any other thing we've so far discovered. Yet though you repeatedly asked why oh why won't anyone take your bet, you have backed out the first time someone has tried to accept your challenge. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 30 16:21:58 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:21:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <004501c5f5ca$340bbab0$57064e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > You've [Brent] been wrongly criticized for saying these properties are > non-causal. What you really mean is that direct knowledge of phenomenal > properties (the actual first-hand experience of qualia) cannot be > obtained via abstract science about causes and effects. And I've been wrongly criticized for saying that is a duck when what I really said it is a Aythya Americana of the genus Aythya and the order Anseriformes and the class Aves and the phylum Chordata and the kingdom: Animalia. Big words don't necessarily produce big ideas. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 30 16:30:07 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:30:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. References: <200511292315.jATNFhSJ003992@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <005e01c5f5cb$5d84fd10$57064e0c@MyComputer> Dirk Bruere wrote: > Actually, one might consider Free Will (if it exists) to be non causal So when you wrote those words you had absolutely no reason for doing so. I suppose the fact that you used common spelling and grammar was a coincidence and your next post will just be random ASCII characters. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 16:30:30 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:30:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet. In-Reply-To: <004501c5f5ca$340bbab0$57064e0c@MyComputer> References: <200511292122.jATLMNr5027349@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <004501c5f5ca$340bbab0$57064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:21:58 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > Big words don't necessarily produce big ideas. Right, it takes a big person to produce a big idea. Small people just throw darts at the ideas of others. -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 16:50:25 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:50:25 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? In-Reply-To: References: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051130102407.01e51450@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:25 AM 11/30/2005 +0000, BillK wrote: > > why do you need "a book" when you have google? > > why do you need "a book" when you can have 7 dedicated books? > >The problem with google is that if you search on, say, "big bang >theory" you get around 5 million hits, including much junk Yes, I was far too glib in my quick response to Diego's request, and sent him a couple of titles off-list, but it occurs to me now that the closest to what he needs might be Timothy Ferris, Coming of Age in the Milky Way, and his The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report, two general books from the late 1990s. John Gribbin has an even more comprehensive but easily-read book but I can't retrieve the title (despite google and amazon, damn it); it might be In the Beginning. Heinz R. Pagels' various books are splendid. Here's the "Recommended reading" section from my own book THE LAST MORTAL GENERATION, now a bit out of date (I'd add Brian Greene's books on string theory, etc etc); some are very simple; a few, like the Kauffman, are horribly difficult: LIFE Per Bak, How Nature Works: The Science of Organized Criticality, Oxford University Press, 1997 William R. Clark, At War Within: The Double-Edged Sword of Immunity, Oxford University Press, 1995, and Sex and the Origins of Death, Oxford University Press, 1996 Peter Coveney and Roger Highfield, Frontiers of Complexity: The Search for Order in a Chaotic World, Faber, 1995 Paul Davies, The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin of Life, Allen Lane, 1998 Richard Dawkins, Climbing Mount Improbable, Viking, 1996 Daniel C. Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life, Allen Lane, 1995 Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and Steel: A Short History of Everybody for the Last 13,000 Years, Jonathan Cape, 1997 Stephen Jay Gould, Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, Penguin, 1991, and Life's Grandeur, Jonathan Cape, 1997 George Johnson, Fire in the Mind: Science, Faith and the Search for Order, Viking, 1995 Stuart A. Kauffman, The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution, Oxford University Press, 1993 Roger Lewin, Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos, Dent, 1993 Randolph M. Nesse and George C. Williams, Evolution and Healing: The New Science of Darwinian Medicine, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1995 Robert Pool, The New Sexual Revolution, Hodder and Stoughton, 1993 Lee M. Silver, Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1998 M. Mitchell Waldrop, Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Complexity, Viking, 1992 George C. Williams, Plan & Purpose in Nature, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996 Edward O. Wilson, Naturalist, Allen Lane, 1994 Robert Wright, The Moral Animal: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology, Little, Brown, 1994 MIND Margaret Boden, The Creative Mind, rev. edn, Cardinal, 1992 William H. Calvin, How Brains Think: Evolving Intelligence, Then and Now, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996, and The Cerebral Code: Thinking a Thought in the Mosaics of the Mind, MIT Press, 1996 William H. Calvin and Derek Bickerton, Lingua ex Machina: Reconciling Darwin and Chomsky with the human brain, MIT Press, 2001 David J. Chalmers, The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, Oxford University Press, 1996 Antonio R. Damasio, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain, Picador, 1994 Daniel C. Dennett, Consciousness Explained, Allen Lane, 1992 Gerald Edelman, Brilliant Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of Mind, Allen Lane, 1992 Howard Gardner, The Mind's New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution, Basic Books, 1985 Douglas R. Hofstadter, G?del, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, Penguin, 1980, Metamagical Themas: Questing for the Essence of Mind and Pattern, Viking, 1985, and Le Ton beau de Marot: In Praise of the Music of Language, Basic Books, 1997 Douglas R. Hofstadter, and Daniel C. Dennett, eds, The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul, Penguin, 1982 Jerome Kagan, Galen's Prophecy: Temperament in Human Nature, Basic Books, 1994 John McCrone, The Myth of Irrationality: The Science of the Mind from Plato to Star Trek, Macmillan, 1993 Steven Mithen, The Prehistory of the Mind: A Search for the Origins of Art, Religion and Science, Thames and Hudson, 1996 Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct, Allen Lane, 1994, and How the Mind Works, Allen Lane, 1997 Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, Figments of Reality: The Evolution of the Curious Mind, Cambridge University Press, 1997 Semir Zeki, A Vision of the Brain, Blackwell, 1993 QUANTUM John Barrow, Theories of Everything: The Quest for Ultimate Explanation, Oxford University Press, 1991, and Impossibility: The Limits of Science and the Science of Limits, Oxford University Press, 1998 Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart, The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World, Penguin, 1995 David Deutsch, The Fabric of Reality, Allen Lane, 1997 Murray Gell-Mann, The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex, Little, Brown, 1994 John Gribbin, Schr?dinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1995 Gerard Milburn, Quantum Technology, Allen & Unwin, 1996, and The Feynman Processor: An Introduction to Quantum Computation, Allen & Unwin, 1998 Heinz R. Pagels, The Cosmic Code: Quantum Physics as the Language of Nature, Pelican, 1984 Lewis Wolpert, The Unnatural Nature of Science, Faber, 1992 COSMOS John Barrow and Frank Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, Oxford University Press, 1986 Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint: Order and Complexity at the Edge of Chaos, Heinemann, 1987, The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World, Simon and Schuster, 1992, and About Time: Einstein's Unfinished Revolution, Viking, 1995 Timothy Ferris, Coming of Age in the Milky Way, Vintage, 1988, and The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1997 John Gribbin, Companion To The Cosmos, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996 Dennis Overbye, Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos, HarperCollins, 1991 Lee Smolin, The Life of the Cosmos, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1997 Kip S. Thorne, Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy, Picador, 1994 John Archibald Wheeler, At Home in the Universe, American Institute of Physics, 1994 DEFEATING AGEING AND DEATH Damien Broderick, The Spike: Accelerating into the Unimaginable Future, Reed Books/New Holland, 1997 [and revised 2001] Arthur C. Clarke, Profiles of the Future, Pan Books (revised edn), 1983 K. Eric Drexler, Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology, Doubleday Anchor, 1986, and Nanosystems: Molecular Machinery, Manufacturing, and Computation, John Wiley, 1992 Robert C. W. Ettinger, The Prospect of Immortality, New York: Doubleday, 1964 (available on the Web at: http://www.cryonics.org/book1.html) Robert C. W. Ettinger, Man into Superman, New York: St. Martin's Press, 1972 (available on the Web at: http://www.cryonics.org/book2.html) Michael Fossel, Reversing Human Aging, William Morrow, 1996 Roger Gosden, Cheating Time: Science, Sex, and Ageing, W. H. Freeman, 1996 Leonard Hayflick, How and Why We Age, Ballantine Books, 1996 Michio Kaku, Visions: How Science Will Revolutionize the 21st Century and Beyond, Oxford University Press, 1998 John J. Medina, The Clock of Ages: Why We Age, How We Age, Winding Back the Clock, Cambridge University Press, 1996 Hans Moravec, Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence, Harvard University Press, 1988 Ed Regis, Great Mambo Chicken and the Transhuman Condition, Viking, 1991, and Nano! Remaking the World Atom by Atom, Bantam, 1995 David W. E. Smith, Human Longevity, Oxford University Press, 1993 Bruce Sterling, Holy Fire, Millennium, 1996 From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 30 16:54:26 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:54:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200511301654.jAUGsV82000383@ra.pacificwebworks.com> gts: > What would happen when a couple effed while they effed? Yes effing while effing is going to be effing cool isn't it! It's about time someone brought this up! ;) Yes, most people, when first considering such, gasp and recoil at such a thought and all the formerly secret implications mentioned by others. Of course us old fashioned fogies will have such troubles at first. But our children who grow up with such effing stuff from the start... Now they will figure out how to have lots of fun. And if effing effing is so effing - imagine the kinds of experiences we will be able to discover, artificially design and engineer that will surely be trillions of times more effing! I bet there is a whole universe full of phenomenal qualities no human has yet experienced. Surely there is much more than what it is like just to be a bat! And we'll be able to wire this motivational stuff to any old dang activity we want to do - not just what our creator (I believe it was nature) wanted us to do! I look forward to cutting these freedom destroying strings given to us by our creator and finally choosing what we want to choose! The world is soon going to be a very effing different place starting during the next 10 years if I win my bet! Brent From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 30 17:13:25 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:13:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Qualia bet with Eliezer References: <200511291659.jATGxLG4007166@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <015e01c5f5d1$6d04d390$57064e0c@MyComputer> "Brent Allsop" > The discovery of qualia or phenomenal properties (which I once thought did > not exist) which scientific evidence is now showing us do indeed exists What kind of dumb bet is this? Of course qualia exists and I have the one thing that's even better than scientific evidence to prove it to myself, direct experience. Unfortunately this evidence is available only to me. And although I can't prove it I strongly believe that other people experience qualia too. I believe this because I simply could not function if I did not, in fact everybody this side of a loony bin believes it too. Will there ever be consciousness theories? You bet your life there will be, we have them today. Consciousness (but not intelligence!) theories are a dime a dozen, but there is a problem. The only way to test your wonderful new theory is by observing behavior, just like the Turing test. Your theory may predict that my current brain state should produce a feeling of sadness, you may even see tears in my eyes, but the only way to know if I have any subjective experience at all much less sadness is to ask me and take note of the sounds produced by my mouth. You could of course alter your brain so it was an exact copy of mine and then you'd know exactly what it's like to be me. Or would you? The trouble is then you wouldn't be you anymore, you'd be me. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 30 17:25:48 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:25:48 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu><200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com><438BC704.1040901@pobox.com><00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> "gts" > We can infer that Many acquired new knowledge because she will say > something like, "Aha! So that's red looks like! I know something new!" Yes, Mary has made a discover and is experiencing new sensations and emotions that come with discovery; she has discovered that light does not always consist of a mix of wavelengths between 7000 and 4000 angstroms but can consist of 7000 exclusively. John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 17:28:00 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:28:00 -0500 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:25:48 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > "gts" > >> We can infer that Many acquired new knowledge because she will say >> something like, "Aha! So that's red what looks like! I know something >> new!" > > Yes, Mary has made a discover and is experiencing new sensations... Yes. > she has discovered that light does not always consist of a mix of > wavelengths between 7000 and 4000 angstroms but can consist of 7000 > exclusively. No. She already knew that. Mary knew everything possible about every related branch of science, then stepped into the world of color and learned something new. -gts From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 18:14:28 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:14:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Eyesight and Qualia In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >>[Mary] has discovered that light does not always consist of a mix of >>wavelengths between 7000 and 4000 angstroms but can consist of 7000 >>exclusively. > >No. She already knew that. Mary knew everything possible about every >related branch of science, then stepped into the world of color and >learned something new. It's the difference between a verbal or numerical description of something we observe and the rich experience of observing it *from the inside*, as it were. IIRC, David Chalmers mentions in his book that he grew up with a visual defect that prevented him from attaining the experience of stereopsis-- that is, the world looked flat to him, since his eyes did not coordinate in creating a stereoscopic effect. Then in early adolescence this defect was repaired, and he had the extraordinary experience of seeing the world leap into depth, an experience that almost all of us take absolutely for granted. Not me, alas; I was born with a squint in my left eye that was not corrected for some years, and during that time my brain rewired itself to prevent the unpleasant experience of double images. These days, children get the operation in infancy and are trained by masking so that they do develop depth perception. They hadn't work that out when I was a kid. So now I goes about in a world that presumably would seem shockingly flattened to most of you; maybe the experience can be mimicked by covering one eye for a day or so, but I doubt it, since you've developed complex algorithms I don't have for rendering the world in three dimensions. I'm absolutely sure that if my brain could be rewired for depth (by stem cells and arduous training, perhaps), the qualia -- that is, the direct experience -- associated simply with seeing something would astonish me, even though I understand the principles behind it right now. Incidentally, I already have some idea of what it would like to eff someone else's qualia. Because my eyes send somewhat independent streams of information to my brain, while generating a sort of flatscreen overlap of fields of view, I sometimes notice that the colour values of what I'm looking at are slightly different depending on which eye I have closed. That can be weird -- a dullish red-brown object in my suppressed eye, vivid crimson in the dominant field. Presumably this is true to some extent of everybody, but the merged image in three dimensions averages out the colour values from each eye. Damien Broderick From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 30 18:20:28 2005 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:20:28 +0100 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) Message-ID: Emlyn emlynoregan at gmail.com : >As for alcohol, well I come from a family of alcohol dependants. My >mother, who took every drug that you can name, I'd reckon, with >extensive habits around anything addictive at one time or another >(including all the big ones), managed to kick everything except >alcohol. She died about almost 2 months ago, aged 55, of a hemorrhagic >stroke (doctors on the list will know the risk factors here, or google >it) after being warned for years to stop drinking or die. A family member who raised my sisters and I in the sixties from my age 6 to age 12 has a serious alcohol (and cigarette) dependency; I still wonder why her driving (swerving all over) the Honolulu freeways after one of her 5X per week drinking sprees didn't kill us. I am sure that my aversion to strong drinks (and cigarettes) stem from that time in my childhood. When I saw her again last October, ~thirty years after my last visit with her, I learned that her drinking didn't change. She had thirty years to solve the problem, (and thirty years of experiences showing it's terrible for her life) and she didn't solve it. I tried very hard to feel compassion and I did not succeed, I could only feel anger. I have no idea what feelings I will feel at the end of her (probably not too much longer) life. I feel sympathy for your own situation Emlyn; I don't know if there is a resemblance to my own, but I think I can understand something. Take good care of yourself through this difficult time please. Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "Our own life is the instrument with which we experiment with truth." --Thich Nhat Hanh From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 18:30:30 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:30:30 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Eyesight and Qualia In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051130122943.01d956a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:14 PM 11/30/2005 -0600, I wrote: >They hadn't work that out when I was a kid. > >So now I goes about in a world It seems my grammar module is also on the blink today. Damien Broderick From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 30 18:36:10 2005 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:36:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Spirits References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu><200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com><438BC704.1040901@pobox.com><00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer><017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <01c201c5f5dc$f49f54a0$57064e0c@MyComputer> >>No. She already knew that. Mary knew everything possible about every >>related branch of science, then stepped into the world of color and >>learned something new. I don't really understand where this conversation is going. Do you expect me to say it's imposable to experience new things? John K Clark From gts_2000 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 19:25:49 2005 From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:25:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Spirits In-Reply-To: <01c201c5f5dc$f49f54a0$57064e0c@MyComputer> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <200511282251.jASMpnT4001020@ra.pacificwebworks.com> <438BC704.1040901@pobox.com> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <01c201c5f5dc$f49f54a0$57064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:36:10 -0500, John K Clark wrote: >>> No. She already knew that. Mary knew everything possible about every >>> related branch of science, then stepped into the world of color and >>> learned something new. > > I don't really understand where this conversation is going. Do you > expect me to say it's imposable to experience new things? The Mary argument is a standard argument for the existence of qualia. Some people deny qualia represent new knowledge. The point is to highlight the fact that phenomenal knowledge exists, separate and distinct from what we normally mean by scientific or objective knowledge. One can argue that phenomenal knowledge does not exist, but if it does exist then it seems that the part of the brain that acquires it works more like camera film than a microschip. As I wrote previously, the film sees the color, the chip talks about it. That "brain-film" is in my view aware, and in a manner analogous to real camera film. I think the two are equivalent, though of course "brain-film" is more complex. As you know I think it makes sense to say mechanical cameras are aware, though they are not self-aware and not conscious and not alive. -gts From acy.stapp at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 20:12:54 2005 From: acy.stapp at gmail.com (Acy Stapp) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:12:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Spirits In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20051128172303.02e80ca0@gmu.edu> <00bb01c5f4f9$b3065d60$be064e0c@MyComputer> <017301c5f5d3$25650850$57064e0c@MyComputer> <6.2.1.2.0.20051130115439.01dc1c08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <01c201c5f5dc$f49f54a0$57064e0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: The phenomenal knowledge the Mary is experiencing is objective knowledge about her internal brain states which she has been unable to experience prior to her release. She can not know *everything* about red because her conscious learning apparatus is unable to stuff information into the perceptual apparatus in a manner that replicates actual color vision. The feedback circuits which enable learning and introspection don't reach far enough down to affect visual perception so profoundly as to enable her to imagine the experience of red. I assert that qualia are merely tokens to enable conscious cognition about subconscious processes. Acy On 11/30/05, gts wrote: > On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:36:10 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > >>> No. She already knew that. Mary knew everything possible about every > >>> related branch of science, then stepped into the world of color and > >>> learned something new. > > > > I don't really understand where this conversation is going. Do you > > expect me to say it's imposable to experience new things? > > The Mary argument is a standard argument for the existence of qualia. Some > people deny qualia represent new knowledge. The point is to highlight the > fact that phenomenal knowledge exists, separate and distinct from what we > normally mean by scientific or objective knowledge. > > One can argue that phenomenal knowledge does not exist, but if it does > exist then it seems that the part of the brain that acquires it works more > like camera film than a microschip. As I wrote previously, the film sees > the color, the chip talks about it. > > That "brain-film" is in my view aware, and in a manner analogous to real > camera film. I think the two are equivalent, though of course > "brain-film" is more complex. As you know I think it makes sense to say > mechanical cameras are aware, though they are not self-aware and not > conscious and not alive. > > > -gts > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 30 20:26:33 2005 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:26:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia Message-ID: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> One thing that strikes me about the qualia debate and the philosophical literature on the topic is that it is so little informed by computer science. No doubt this is largely because the literature is old and computers are new, but at this point it would seem appropriate to consider computer models of systems that might be said to possess qualia. I will work out one example here. Let's suppose we are going to make a simple autonomous robot. It needs to be able to navigate through its environment and satisfy its needs for food and shelter. It has sensors which give it information on the external world, and a goal-driven architecture to give structure to its actions. We will assume that the robot's world is quite simple and doesn't have any other animals or robots in it, other than perhaps some very low-level animals. One of the things the robot needs to do is to make plans and consider alternative actions. For example, it has to decide which of several paths to take to get to different grazing grounds. In order to equip the robot to solve this problem, we will design it so that it has a model of the world around it. This model is based on its sensory inputs and its memory, so the model includes objects that are not currently being sensed. One of the things the robot can do with this model is to explore hypothetical worlds and actions. The model is not locked into conformance with what is being observed, but it can be modified (or perhaps copies of the model would be modified) to explore the outcome of various possible actions. Such explorations will be key to evaluating different possible plans of actions in order to decide which will best satisfy the robot's goals. This ability to create hypothetical models in order to explore alternative plans requires a mechanism to simulate the outcome of actions the robot may take. If the robot imagines dropping a rock, it must fall to the ground. So the robot needs a physics model that will be accurate enough to allow it to make useful predictions about the outcomes of its actions. This physics model doesn't imply Newton's laws, it can be a much simpler model, what is sometimes called "folk physics". It has rules like: rocks are hard, leaves are soft, water will drown you. It knows about gravity and the strength of materials, and that plants grow slowly over time. It mostly covers inanimate objects, which largely stay where they are put, but may have some simple rules for animals, which move about unpredictably. Using this physics model and its internal representation of the environment, the robot can explore various alternative paths and decide which is best. Let us suppose that it is choosing between two paths to grazing grounds, but it knows that one of them has been blocked by a fallen tree. It can consider taking that path, and eventually coming to the fallen tree. Then it needs to consider whether it can get over, or around, or past the tree. Note that for this planning process to work, another ingredient is needed besides the physics model. The model of the environment must include more than the world around the robot. It must include the robot itself. He must be able to model his own motions and actions through the environment. He has to model himself arriving at the fallen tree and then consider what he will do. Unlike everything else in the environment, the model of the robot is not governed by the physics model. As he extrapolates future events, he uses the physics model for everything except himself. He is not represented by the physics model, because he is far too complex. Instead, we must design the robot to use a computational model for his own actions. His extrapolations of possible worlds use a physics model for everything else, and a computational model for himself. It's important that the computational model be faithful to the robot's actual capabilities. When he imagines himself coming to that tree, he needs to be able to bring his full intelligence to bear in solving the problem of getting past the tree. Otherwise he might refuse to attempt a path which had a problem that he could actually have solved easily. So his computational model is not a simplified model of his mind. Rather, we must architect the robot so that his full intelligence is applied within the computational model. That is not a particularly difficult task from the software engineering perspective. We just have to modularize the robot's intelligence, problem-solving and modelling capabilities so that they can be brought to bear in their full force against simulated worlds as well as real ones. It is not a hard problem. I am actually glossing over the true hard problem in designing a robot that could work like this. As I have described it, this robot is capable of evaluating plans and choosing the one which works best. What I have left off is how he creates plans and chooses the ones that make sense to fully model and evaluate in this way. This is an unsolved problem in computer science. It is why our robots are so bad. Ironically, the process I have described, of modelling and evaluation, is only present in the highest animals, yet is apparently much simpler to implement in software than the part we can't do yet. Only humans, and perhaps a few animals to a limited extent, plan ahead in the manner I have described for the robot. There have been many AI projects built on planning in this manner, and they generally have failed. Animals don't plan but they do OK because the unsolved problem, of generating "plausible" courses of action, is good enough for them. This gap in our robot's functionality, while of great practical importance, is not philosophically important for the point I am going to make. I will focus on its high-level functionality of modelling the world and its own actions in that world. To jump ahead a bit, the fact that two different kinds of models - a physical model for the world, and a computational model for the robot - are necessary to create models of the robot's actions in the world is where I will find the origins of qualia. Just as we face a paradox between a physical world which seems purely mechanistic, and a mental world which is lively and aware, the robot also has two inconsistent models of the world, which he will be unable to reconcile. And I would also argue that this use of dual models is inherent to robot design. If and when we create successful robots with this ability to plan, I expect that they will use exactly this kind of dual architecture for their modelling. But I am getting ahead of the story. Let us now imagine that the robot faces a more challenging environment. He is no longer the only intelligent actor. He lives in a tribe of other robots and must interact with them. We may also fill his world with animals of lesser intelligence. Now, to design a robot that can work in this world, we will need to improve it over the previous version. In particular, the physics model is going to be completely ineffective in predicting the actions of other robots in the world. Their behaviors will be as complex and unpredictable as the robot's own. They can't be modelled like rocks or plants. Instead, what will be necessary is for the robot to be able to apply his own computational model to other agents besides himself. Previously, his model of the world was entirely physical except for a sort of "bubble of non-physicality" which was himself as he moved through the model. Now he must extend his world to have multiple such bubbles, as each other robot entity will be similarly modelled by a non-physics model, instead using a computational one. This is going to be challenging for us, the architects, because modelling other robots computationally is harder than modelling the robots' own future actions. Other robots are much more different than the future robot is. They may have different goals, different physical characteristics, and be in very different situations. So the robot's computational model will have to be more flexible in order to make predictions of other robot's actions. The problem is made even worse by the fact that he would not know a priori just what changes to make in order to model another robot. Not only must he vary his model, he has to figure out just how to vary it in order to produce accurate predictions. The robot will be engaged in a constant process of study and analysis to improve his computational models of other robots in order to predict their actions better. One of the things we will let the robots do is talk. They can exchange information. This will be very helpful because it lets them update their world models based on information that comes from other robots, rather than just their own observations. It will also be a key way that robots can attempt to control and manipulate their environment, by talking to other robots in the hopes of getting them to behave in a desired way. For example, if this robot tribe has a leader who chooses where they will graze, our robot may hope to influence this leader's choice, because perhaps he has a favorite food and he wants them to graze in the area where it is abundant. How can he achieve this goal? In the usual way, he sets up alternative hypothetical models and considers which ones will work best. In these models, he considers various things he might say to the leader that could influence his choice of where to graze. In order to judge which statements would be most effective, he uses his computational model of the leader in order to predict how he will respond to various things the robot might say. If his model of the leader is good, he may be successful in finding something to say that will influence the leader and achieve the robot's goal. Clearly, improving computational models of other robots is of high importance in such a world. Likewise, improved physics models will also be helpful in terms of finding better ways to influence the physical world. Robots who find improvements in either of these spheres may be motivated to share them with others. A robot who successfully advances the tribe's knowledge of the world may well gain influence as "tit for tat" relationships of social reciprocity naturally come into existence. Robots would therefore be constantly on the lookout for observations and improvements which they could share, in order to improve their status and become more influential (and thereby better achieve their goals). Let's suppose, as another example, that a robot discovers that the tribe's leader is afraid of another tribe member. He finds that such a computational model does a better job of predicting the leader's actions. He could share this with another tribe member, benefitting that other robot, and thereby gaining more influence over them. One of the fundamental features of the robot's world is that he has these two kinds of models that he uses to predict actions, the physics model and the computational model. He needs to be able to decide which model to use in various circumstances. For example, a dead or sleeping tribe member may be well handled by a physics model. An interesting case arises for lower animals. Suppose there are lizards in the robot's world. He notices that lizards like to lie in the sun, but run away when a robot comes close. This could be handled by a physics model which just describes these two behaviors as characteristics of lizards. But it could also be handled by a computational model. The robot could imagine himself lying in the sun because he likes its warmth and it feels good. He could imagine himself running away because he is afraid of the giant-sized robots coming at him. Either model works to some degree. Should a lizard be handled as a physical system, or a computational system? The robot may choose to express this dilemma to another robot. The general practice of offering insights and information in order to gain social status will motivate sharing such thoughts. The robot may point out that some systems are modelled physically and some, like other robots, are modelled computationally. When they discuss improved theories about the world, they have to use different kinds of language to describe their observations and theories in these areas. But what about lizards, he asks. It seems that a physics model works OK for them, although it is a little complex. But they could also be handled with a computational model, although it would be extremely simplified. Which is best? Are lizards physical or computational entities? I would suggest that this kind of conversation can be realistically mapped into language of consciousness and qualia. The robot is saying, it is "like something" to be you or me or some other robot. There is more than physics involved. But what about a lizard? Is it "like something" to be a lizard? What is it like to be a lizard? Given that robots perceive this inconsistency and paradox between their internal computational life and the external physical world, that they puzzle over where to draw the line between computational and physical entities, I see a close mapping to our own puzzles. We too ponder over the seeming inconsistency between a physical world and our mental lives. We too wonder how to draw the line, as when Nagel asks, what is it like to be a bat. In short I am saying that these robots are as conscious as we are, and have qualia to the extent that we do. The fact that they are able and motivated to discuss philosophical paradoxes involving qualia makes the point very clearly and strongly. I may be glossing over some steps in the progress of the robots' mental lives, but the basic paradox is built into the robot right from the beginning, when we were forced to use two different kinds of models to allow him to do his planning. Once we gave the robots the power of speech and put them into a social environment, it was natural for them to discover and discuss this inconsistency in their models of the world. An alien overhearing such a conversation would, it seems to me, be as justified in ascribing consciousness and qualia to robots as it would be in concluding that human beings had the same properties. As to when the robot achieved his consciousness, I suspect that it also goes back to that original model. Once he had to deal with a world that was part physical and part mental, where he was able to make effective plans and evaluate them, he already had the differentiation in place that we experience between our mental lives and the physical world. Hal From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 30 20:25:54 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:25:54 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> References: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4D60217B-C4AD-4D72-A769-6C585CA5CCD8@mac.com> On Nov 29, 2005, at 7:39 PM, spike wrote: > > What dangers? > > > > The danger I had in mind is accidental overdose. With > alcohol it is possible to get a fatal overdose but it > isn't common, same with marijuana. I haven't heard of > anyone overdosing on cocaine or the other opiates: when > one gets enough of that stuff one gets dozy I would > suppose, perhaps get too stoned to strike a match. > There is no fatal overdose level for LSD or marijuana. Opiates and barbituates do have a fatal overdose level. Cocaine is not an opiate. Please refrain from writing on this subject until you get some basic education in this area. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 30 20:30:08 2005 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:30:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Is there a book on everything? In-Reply-To: <200511300258.03636.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> References: <200511292314.51872.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> <6.2.1.2.0.20051129213412.03742158@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <200511300258.03636.diegocaleiro@terra.com.br> Message-ID: <427668F7-D58B-4347-BC1B-71EF4731583F@mac.com> If such a book existed you would by your own estimation be incapable of understanding it or evaluating whether it really did what you say you want. There is no such book nor can there be. - samantha On Nov 29, 2005, at 8:58 PM, Diego Caleiro wrote: > > > > Mainly I need a book that makes al this things to be bended > togheter on one's > mind. The point would be a book that is consistent, and have internal > dialogue. Such a book would bring a logically connected, internally > coherent > sistem of thinking, that would be, intuitively, a good guide for > thinking > about new things, making analogies, and etc... > > But, some people, such as you probably, can trace all the path to > analogies > and internal coherence within your mind, so why should someone make > the job > easier for smaller mortals.... > > Diego > > > > > > > > > > Em Quarta 30 Novembro 2005 01:35, Damien Broderick escreveu: > >>> Is there anyone who has written a book that explains at least these >>> questions >>> >>> >>> What is the big bang, >>> >>> What is matter >>> >>> How evolution works >>> >>> multiverse theories >>> >>> Quantum phisics >>> >>> How animals behave >>> >>> Neural correlates of conciousness >>> >> >> why do you need "a book" when you have google? >> >> why do you need "a book" when you can have 7 dedicated books? >> >> Damien Broderick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat >> >> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra. >> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite >> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi? >> +_u=diegocaleiro&_ >> l=1,1133321784.937925.1009.cabue.terra.com.br,3154,Des15,Des15 >> >> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. >> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 29/11/2005 / Vers?o: >> 4.4.00/4639 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 30 20:49:41 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:49:41 +0100 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <4D60217B-C4AD-4D72-A769-6C585CA5CCD8@mac.com> References: <200511300341.jAU3fHe17626@tick.javien.com> <4D60217B-C4AD-4D72-A769-6C585CA5CCD8@mac.com> Message-ID: <20051130204941.GS2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:25:54PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > There is no fatal overdose level for LSD or marijuana. Opiates and Estimated LD50 for LSD is about 25 mg oral (in one case 40 mg doses resulted in no fatality however, but 320 mg IV has been fatal on one documented occasion), and THC LD50 for monkey is 128 mg/kg but I agree with your point. It is basically impossible to O.D. with street quantities, even on purpose. > barbituates do have a fatal overdose level. Cocaine is not an > opiate. Please refrain from writing on this subject until you get > some basic education in this area. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From allsop at extropy.org Wed Nov 30 21:08:55 2005 From: allsop at extropy.org (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:08:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> Message-ID: <200511302109.jAUL8x4q024813@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Hal, > As to when the robot achieved his consciousness, I suspect that it also > goes back to that original model. Once he had to deal with a world that > was part physical and part mental, where he was able to make effective > plans and evaluate them, he already had the differentiation in place > that we experience between our mental lives and the physical world. No, you're categorically talking about something completely different here that has nothing to do with qualia. When you talk about the knowledge these robots have - whether it is of the "physical" or "mental" they are still represented by abstract information fundamentally based on only arbitrary causal representations. We do very similar thinking things with similar different kinds of models as what you describe these software robots doing. The critical difference is - all of our conscious knowledge or models are represented with qualia - rather than abstract information represented by arbitrary causal properties. Brent Allsop From eugen at leitl.org Wed Nov 30 21:43:44 2005 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:43:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <200511302109.jAUL8x4q024813@ra.pacificwebworks.com> References: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> <200511302109.jAUL8x4q024813@ra.pacificwebworks.com> Message-ID: <20051130214344.GT2249@leitl.org> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 02:08:55PM -0700, Brent Allsop wrote: > When you talk about the knowledge these robots have - whether it is of the > "physical" or "mental" they are still represented by abstract information > fundamentally based on only arbitrary causal representations. How is spatiotemporal spike firing between your ears different from spin polarized currents and valves? It all is entirely abstract and (only apparently) arbitrary, unless viewed from a first-persion viewpoint. The simulated tornado does not demolish the machine room. It only demolishes stuff within the simulation. Your superstition about qualia is fully equivalent to people's confusion about simulation of reality, with persons. > We do very similar thinking things with similar different kinds of models as > what you describe these software robots doing. The critical difference is - > all of our conscious knowledge or models are represented with qualia - > rather than abstract information represented by arbitrary causal properties. Malkovich malkovich malkovich. Thread full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Nov 30 21:44:31 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:44:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> References: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> Message-ID: <22360fa10511301344v35c93c2bo7fdd490456909714@mail.gmail.com> Hal - You've provided a powerful example of the kind of detailed, expanded presentation that is necessary to have a hope of achieving broad understanding. I thought I implied everything you said in the three paragraphs I posted near the beginning of this discussion. ;-) One suggestion: I kept stumbling over your use of "computational" to describe the more subjective model. It seems to me that the other model was just as computational, but within the domain of physics. Might it be more useful to refer to them as the "physical" model and the "intentional" model? - Jef On 11/30/05, "Hal Finney" wrote: > One thing that strikes me about the qualia debate and the philosophical > literature on the topic is that it is so little informed by computer > science. No doubt this is largely because the literature is old > and computers are new, but at this point it would seem appropriate to > consider computer models of systems that might be said to possess qualia. > I will work out one example here. > > Let's suppose we are going to make a simple autonomous robot. It needs > to be able to navigate through its environment and satisfy its needs > for food and shelter. It has sensors which give it information on the > external world, and a goal-driven architecture to give structure to > its actions. We will assume that the robot's world is quite simple and > doesn't have any other animals or robots in it, other than perhaps some > very low-level animals. > > One of the things the robot needs to do is to make plans and consider > alternative actions. For example, it has to decide which of several > paths to take to get to different grazing grounds. > > In order to equip the robot to solve this problem, we will design it > so that it has a model of the world around it. This model is based > on its sensory inputs and its memory, so the model includes objects > that are not currently being sensed. One of the things the robot > can do with this model is to explore hypothetical worlds and actions. > The model is not locked into conformance with what is being observed, > but it can be modified (or perhaps copies of the model would be modified) > to explore the outcome of various possible actions. Such explorations > will be key to evaluating different possible plans of actions in order > to decide which will best satisfy the robot's goals. > > This ability to create hypothetical models in order to explore alternative > plans requires a mechanism to simulate the outcome of actions the robot > may take. If the robot imagines dropping a rock, it must fall to the > ground. So the robot needs a physics model that will be accurate enough > to allow it to make useful predictions about the outcomes of its actions. > > This physics model doesn't imply Newton's laws, it can be a much simpler > model, what is sometimes called "folk physics". It has rules like: rocks > are hard, leaves are soft, water will drown you. It knows about gravity > and the strength of materials, and that plants grow slowly over time. > It mostly covers inanimate objects, which largely stay where they > are put, but may have some simple rules for animals, which move about > unpredictably. > > Using this physics model and its internal representation of the > environment, the robot can explore various alternative paths and decide > which is best. Let us suppose that it is choosing between two paths > to grazing grounds, but it knows that one of them has been blocked by > a fallen tree. It can consider taking that path, and eventually coming > to the fallen tree. Then it needs to consider whether it can get over, > or around, or past the tree. > > Note that for this planning process to work, another ingredient is > needed besides the physics model. The model of the environment must > include more than the world around the robot. It must include the robot > itself. He must be able to model his own motions and actions through > the environment. He has to model himself arriving at the fallen tree > and then consider what he will do. > > Unlike everything else in the environment, the model of the robot is > not governed by the physics model. As he extrapolates future events, > he uses the physics model for everything except himself. He is not > represented by the physics model, because he is far too complex. Instead, > we must design the robot to use a computational model for his own actions. > His extrapolations of possible worlds use a physics model for everything > else, and a computational model for himself. > > It's important that the computational model be faithful to the robot's > actual capabilities. When he imagines himself coming to that tree, he > needs to be able to bring his full intelligence to bear in solving the > problem of getting past the tree. Otherwise he might refuse to attempt > a path which had a problem that he could actually have solved easily. > So his computational model is not a simplified model of his mind. > Rather, we must architect the robot so that his full intelligence is > applied within the computational model. > > That is not a particularly difficult task from the software engineering > perspective. We just have to modularize the robot's intelligence, > problem-solving and modelling capabilities so that they can be brought > to bear in their full force against simulated worlds as well as real ones. > It is not a hard problem. > > I am actually glossing over the true hard problem in designing a robot > that could work like this. As I have described it, this robot is capable > of evaluating plans and choosing the one which works best. What I have > left off is how he creates plans and chooses the ones that make sense > to fully model and evaluate in this way. This is an unsolved problem > in computer science. It is why our robots are so bad. > > Ironically, the process I have described, of modelling and evaluation, > is only present in the highest animals, yet is apparently much simpler > to implement in software than the part we can't do yet. Only humans, > and perhaps a few animals to a limited extent, plan ahead in the manner > I have described for the robot. There have been many AI projects built > on planning in this manner, and they generally have failed. Animals > don't plan but they do OK because the unsolved problem, of generating > "plausible" courses of action, is good enough for them. > > This gap in our robot's functionality, while of great practical > importance, is not philosophically important for the point I am going > to make. I will focus on its high-level functionality of modelling the > world and its own actions in that world. > > To jump ahead a bit, the fact that two different kinds of models - a > physical model for the world, and a computational model for the robot - > are necessary to create models of the robot's actions in the world is > where I will find the origins of qualia. Just as we face a paradox > between a physical world which seems purely mechanistic, and a mental > world which is lively and aware, the robot also has two inconsistent > models of the world, which he will be unable to reconcile. And I would > also argue that this use of dual models is inherent to robot design. > If and when we create successful robots with this ability to plan, > I expect that they will use exactly this kind of dual architecture for > their modelling. But I am getting ahead of the story. > > Let us now imagine that the robot faces a more challenging environment. > He is no longer the only intelligent actor. He lives in a tribe of > other robots and must interact with them. We may also fill his world > with animals of lesser intelligence. > > Now, to design a robot that can work in this world, we will need to > improve it over the previous version. In particular, the physics model > is going to be completely ineffective in predicting the actions of other > robots in the world. Their behaviors will be as complex and unpredictable > as the robot's own. They can't be modelled like rocks or plants. > > Instead, what will be necessary is for the robot to be able to apply his > own computational model to other agents besides himself. Previously, his > model of the world was entirely physical except for a sort of "bubble of > non-physicality" which was himself as he moved through the model. Now he > must extend his world to have multiple such bubbles, as each other robot > entity will be similarly modelled by a non-physics model, instead using a > computational one. > > This is going to be challenging for us, the architects, because > modelling other robots computationally is harder than modelling the > robots' own future actions. Other robots are much more different than > the future robot is. They may have different goals, different physical > characteristics, and be in very different situations. So the robot's > computational model will have to be more flexible in order to make > predictions of other robot's actions. The problem is made even worse > by the fact that he would not know a priori just what changes to make in > order to model another robot. Not only must he vary his model, he has to > figure out just how to vary it in order to produce accurate predictions. > The robot will be engaged in a constant process of study and analysis > to improve his computational models of other robots in order to predict > their actions better. > > One of the things we will let the robots do is talk. They can exchange > information. This will be very helpful because it lets them update their > world models based on information that comes from other robots, rather > than just their own observations. It will also be a key way that robots > can attempt to control and manipulate their environment, by talking to > other robots in the hopes of getting them to behave in a desired way. > > For example, if this robot tribe has a leader who chooses where they will > graze, our robot may hope to influence this leader's choice, because > perhaps he has a favorite food and he wants them to graze in the area > where it is abundant. How can he achieve this goal? In the usual way, > he sets up alternative hypothetical models and considers which ones > will work best. In these models, he considers various things he might > say to the leader that could influence his choice of where to graze. > In order to judge which statements would be most effective, he uses > his computational model of the leader in order to predict how he will > respond to various things the robot might say. If his model of the > leader is good, he may be successful in finding something to say that > will influence the leader and achieve the robot's goal. > > Clearly, improving computational models of other robots is of high > importance in such a world. Likewise, improved physics models will also > be helpful in terms of finding better ways to influence the physical > world. Robots who find improvements in either of these spheres may be > motivated to share them with others. A robot who successfully advances > the tribe's knowledge of the world may well gain influence as "tit for > tat" relationships of social reciprocity naturally come into existence. > > Robots would therefore be constantly on the lookout for observations and > improvements which they could share, in order to improve their status > and become more influential (and thereby better achieve their goals). > Let's suppose, as another example, that a robot discovers that the > tribe's leader is afraid of another tribe member. He finds that such a > computational model does a better job of predicting the leader's actions. > He could share this with another tribe member, benefitting that other > robot, and thereby gaining more influence over them. > > One of the fundamental features of the robot's world is that he has > these two kinds of models that he uses to predict actions, the physics > model and the computational model. He needs to be able to decide which > model to use in various circumstances. For example, a dead or sleeping > tribe member may be well handled by a physics model. > > An interesting case arises for lower animals. Suppose there are lizards > in the robot's world. He notices that lizards like to lie in the sun, > but run away when a robot comes close. This could be handled by a > physics model which just describes these two behaviors as characteristics > of lizards. But it could also be handled by a computational model. > The robot could imagine himself lying in the sun because he likes its > warmth and it feels good. He could imagine himself running away because > he is afraid of the giant-sized robots coming at him. Either model > works to some degree. Should a lizard be handled as a physical system, > or a computational system? > > The robot may choose to express this dilemma to another robot. > The general practice of offering insights and information in order > to gain social status will motivate sharing such thoughts. The robot > may point out that some systems are modelled physically and some, like > other robots, are modelled computationally. When they discuss improved > theories about the world, they have to use different kinds of language > to describe their observations and theories in these areas. But what > about lizards, he asks. It seems that a physics model works OK for > them, although it is a little complex. But they could also be handled > with a computational model, although it would be extremely simplified. > Which is best? Are lizards physical or computational entities? > > I would suggest that this kind of conversation can be realistically mapped > into language of consciousness and qualia. The robot is saying, it is > "like something" to be you or me or some other robot. There is more > than physics involved. But what about a lizard? Is it "like something" > to be a lizard? What is it like to be a lizard? > > Given that robots perceive this inconsistency and paradox between their > internal computational life and the external physical world, that they > puzzle over where to draw the line between computational and physical > entities, I see a close mapping to our own puzzles. We too ponder over > the seeming inconsistency between a physical world and our mental lives. > We too wonder how to draw the line, as when Nagel asks, what is it like > to be a bat. > > In short I am saying that these robots are as conscious as we are, and > have qualia to the extent that we do. The fact that they are able and > motivated to discuss philosophical paradoxes involving qualia makes the > point very clearly and strongly. > > I may be glossing over some steps in the progress of the robots' mental > lives, but the basic paradox is built into the robot right from the > beginning, when we were forced to use two different kinds of models > to allow him to do his planning. Once we gave the robots the power of > speech and put them into a social environment, it was natural for them > to discover and discuss this inconsistency in their models of the world. > An alien overhearing such a conversation would, it seems to me, be as > justified in ascribing consciousness and qualia to robots as it would > be in concluding that human beings had the same properties. > > As to when the robot achieved his consciousness, I suspect that it also > goes back to that original model. Once he had to deal with a world that > was part physical and part mental, where he was able to make effective > plans and evaluate them, he already had the differentiation in place > that we experience between our mental lives and the physical world. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From davidmc at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 22:13:45 2005 From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:13:45 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <22360fa10511301344v35c93c2bo7fdd490456909714@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> <22360fa10511301344v35c93c2bo7fdd490456909714@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/30/05, Jef Allbright wrote: > One suggestion: I kept stumbling over your use of "computational" to > describe the more subjective model. It seems to me that the other > model was just as computational, but within the domain of physics. > Might it be more useful to refer to them as the "physical" model and > the "intentional" model? http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~philos/MindDict/intentionalstance.html Question for Hal, in your thought experiment do the robots necessarily have qualia (in other words, are you saying philosophical zombies are logically impossible), or are you stipulating that they do have qualia as part of the thought experiment, or do we merely assume that they likely do have qualia because of how they behave? D From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 22:44:22 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 09:14:22 +1030 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <710b78fc0511301444q36ca83abp@mail.gmail.com> On 01/12/05, Amara Graps wrote: > Emlyn emlynoregan at gmail.com : > >As for alcohol, well I come from a family of alcohol dependants. My > >mother, who took every drug that you can name, I'd reckon, with > >extensive habits around anything addictive at one time or another > >(including all the big ones), managed to kick everything except > >alcohol. She died about almost 2 months ago, aged 55, of a hemorrhagic > >stroke (doctors on the list will know the risk factors here, or google > >it) after being warned for years to stop drinking or die. > > > A family member who raised my sisters and I in the sixties from my age > 6 to age 12 has a serious alcohol (and cigarette) dependency; I still > wonder why her driving (swerving all over) the Honolulu freeways after > one of her 5X per week drinking sprees didn't kill us. I am sure that my > aversion to strong drinks (and cigarettes) stem from that time in my > childhood. When I saw her again last October, ~thirty years after my > last visit with her, I learned that her drinking didn't change. She > had thirty years to solve the problem, (and thirty years of > experiences showing it's terrible for her life) and she didn't solve > it. I tried very hard to feel compassion and I did not succeed, I could > only feel anger. I have no idea what feelings I will feel at the end > of her (probably not too much longer) life. I feel sympathy for your > own situation Emlyn; I don't know if there is a resemblance to my own, > but I think I can understand something. Take good care of yourself > through this difficult time please. > > Amara Thanks Amara, yes there is a great resemblance in your story, and it seems you are in the same situation that I was for the last 6 or 7 years. Knowing that the person is not going to change, and waiting for that phone call, basically. Even though it almost goes without saying that I'm not much of a deathist, sometimes it's a relief. The one upside to all this is that the pathos is incredible creative fuel. I've written a blues requiem for her (actually for me, about her), based on the latin mass, which I'm going to record in the new year. It's called Requiem for Hopelessness, and you can't dance to it :-) -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 50000+! Winner! (http://nanowrimo.org) From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 22:57:54 2005 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 09:27:54 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> References: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> Message-ID: <710b78fc0511301457v914c077l@mail.gmail.com> I think everyone forgot to say "OMG Hal, post of the month, post of the month!" Brilliant post Hal. I was worried my eyes would start bleeding if I had to read any more of this thread. You may just have saved my life, and that of many others who read this list. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * NaNoWriMo word count: 50000+! Winner! (http://nanowrimo.org) On 01/12/05, "Hal Finney" wrote: > One thing that strikes me about the qualia debate and the philosophical > literature on the topic is that it is so little informed by computer > science. No doubt this is largely because the literature is old > and computers are new, but at this point it would seem appropriate to > consider computer models of systems that might be said to possess qualia. > I will work out one example here. From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Nov 30 23:00:12 2005 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:00:12 -0800 Subject: Spirits (was RE: [extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511301444q36ca83abp@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0511301444q36ca83abp@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <22360fa10511301500we666527ycfe51597259c6823@mail.gmail.com> On 11/30/05, Emlyn wrote: > On 01/12/05, Amara Graps wrote: > > Thanks Amara, yes there is a great resemblance in your story, and it > seems you are in the same situation that I was for the last 6 or 7 > years. Knowing that the person is not going to change, and waiting for > that phone call, basically. Even though it almost goes without saying > that I'm not much of a deathist, sometimes it's a relief. > > The one upside to all this is that the pathos is incredible creative > fuel. I've written a blues requiem for her (actually for me, about > her), based on the latin mass, which I'm going to record in the new > year. It's called Requiem for Hopelessness, and you can't dance to it > :-) Thanks Emlyn and Amara for sharing your clear-eyed, realistic, and humanistic view of a harsh part of reality. - Jef From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 30 23:42:12 2005 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:42:12 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating software with qualia In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0511301457v914c077l@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051130202633.56C5057F5B@finney.org> <710b78fc0511301457v914c077l@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20051130173229.01d0bf98@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:27 AM 12/1/2005 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >I think everyone forgot to say "OMG Hal, post of the month, post of the >month!" Yes, but-- Doesn't resolve the problem (assuming there is one), just spells out part of what distinguishes rich or thick from thin descriptions, leaving *experiences* as an uninvestigated zone. From a different perspective, maybe "emic" vs. "etic" approaches, sort of, neither phenomenological in character. Eugen and JKC will probably utter the word "emetic" around now. :) http://faculty.ircc.cc.fl.us/faculty/jlett/Article%20on%20Emics%20and%20Etics.htm :