From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 00:28:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:28:54 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, estropico wrote: > Italy (like any other country) is unique. Part of its "uniqueness" is > the presence of the Vatican and the power of catholic institutions. What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they don't have massive research institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to do with transhumanism? > Is this an obstacle to the transhumanist project? Often it is > (embryonic stem cells), sometimes it isn't (genetically modified > crops). So, which is the best approach? I don't claim to know, but I The religious institutions are not doing ES cell nor GMO research. > see that all mainstream parties, on both the left and right, are > always very cautious not to upset the "catholic vote", and I see that > the most anti-catholic (in the political sense) parties are the small An unfortunate distinction to make ... has little relevance to the research and technology issues, except perhaps funding cost, but we're increasingly able to do research without financial cost (more "DIY"). > ones. I also see that Italians have a healty tendency to take the > Vatican's pronouncements with a pinch of salt. How else to explain > Italy's birthrates (among the lowest in the world), given the Vatican > stance on contraception? Am I the only one to think that twenty years > from now Italians will take the same pragmatic approach to > life-extension therapies? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 00:31:51 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:31:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <580930c20802291055s1d21fdc0x28f2bce338c2493d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802291055s1d21fdc0x28f2bce338c2493d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802291831.52012.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > According to various interesting polls, I believe it fair to say that > the country the most transhumanist by far in terms of popular > mentality is without any doubt India. I wonder if Ramanujan would have counted as a transhumanist. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 1 00:34:30 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:34:30 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080229183221.0238eb28@satx.rr.com> At 06:28 PM 2/29/2008 -0600, Bryan Bishop wrote: >[estropico wrote:] > > Italy (like any other country) is unique. Part of its "uniqueness" is > > the presence of the Vatican and the power of catholic institutions. > >What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they don't >have massive research institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the >only power they have is lots of listeners and a widely distributed >mental program. What does this power have to do with transhumanism? Uh oh. Have you never heard of Stalin's famous contemptuous taunt: "How many divisions does the Pope have?" Damien Broderick From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 00:49:04 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:49:04 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080229183221.0238eb28@satx.rr.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080229183221.0238eb28@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200802291849.04618.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > >What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they > > don't have massive research institutions, they don't have > > neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a > > widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to do > > with transhumanism? > > Uh oh. Have you never heard of Stalin's famous contemptuous taunt: > "How many divisions does the Pope have?" No, I hadn't, but what difference does it make how many the Pope has? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 00:54:16 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:54:16 -0600 Subject: [ExI] [Bio, News] Alnylam says it has acheived RNAi first In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200802291854.16675.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > Alnylam is seeking to develop novel technologies based on RNA > interference, or RNAi, a naturally occurring mechanism within cells > for selectively silencing and regulating specific genes; because many > diseases are caused by the inappropriate activity of specific cells, > the ability to silence genes selectively through RNAi is thought to > have great potential. http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/ejb/v6n1/a01.pdf http://idi.harvard.edu/pdfs/cbrbreakthrough_dec2006.pdf http://www.dharmacon.com/docs/siRNA%20Reading%20List_083105.pdf http://www.biochemsoctrans.org/bst/032/0952/0320952.pdf http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/36777/frontmatter/9780521836777_frontmatter.pdf - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Sat Mar 1 04:31:44 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:31:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <625860.90409.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Bishop wrote: On Friday 29 February 2008, estropico wrote: >>Italy (like any other country) is unique. Part of >>its "uniqueness" is the presence of the Vatican and >>the power of catholic institutions. >What power? Money? They certainly don't have >supercomputers, they don't have massive research >institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the only >power they have is lots of listeners and a widely >distributed mental program. What does this power >have to do with transhumanism? What power do they have? The power to influence many people as much as any religion, race and/or language. Funny thing is that is any organization that wants to become a "fundamental" recognition has to understand that there will be followers and to understand the general thinking of others. This is so important it's beyond belief. You don't make a movement without a great cause. Whether the Vatican is involved or not should not be an issue. People lead not religion. Just an opinion Anna Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 04:44:34 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 22:44:34 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <625860.90409.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <625860.90409.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200802292244.34178.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Anna Taylor wrote: > What power do they have? ?The power to influence many > people as much as any religion, race and/or language. The unspoken portion here is probably "and they will want to stop us." Really? They haven't been stopping us yet, and we've been freezing people, doing brain-computer interfaces, making rockets, experimenting in nanotech, stem cells, etc. No matter how much they want it to not be true that stem cells don't exist, they in fact do exist, for example. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Sat Mar 1 05:07:51 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 00:07:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200802292244.34178.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <746181.66790.qm@web30408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Bishop wrote: >The unspoken portion here is probably "and they will >want to stop us." Really? They haven't been stopping >us yet, and we've been freezing people, doing brain->computer interfaces, making rockets, experimenting >in nanotech, stem cells, etc. No matter how much >they want it to not be true that stem cells don't >exist, they in fact do exist, for example. My computer broke down the other day. I was petrified. What to do without my computer? I went to see the tech guy...I got a diagnostic..didn't tell me much...but poof my computer started working again. I don't know why. The point of the story is that technology is the wave of the future and i'm sure that many knowledgeable, intelligent, smart, and /or creative people are paying attention, it doesn't take a religion to confirm it and it doesn't take a an Atheist to believe it. Anna:) Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane with All new Yahoo! Mail: http://ca.promos.yahoo.com/newmail/overview2/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 05:50:20 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:50:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <746181.66790.qm@web30408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <746181.66790.qm@web30408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200802292350.20093.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Anna Taylor wrote: > My computer broke down the other day. ?I was > petrified. ?What to do without my computer? I went to > see the tech guy...I got a diagnostic..didn't tell me > much...but poof my computer started working again. ?I > don't know why. ?The point of the story is that > technology is the wave of the future and i'm sure that > many knowledgeable, intelligent, smart, and /or > creative people are paying attention, it doesn't take > a religion to confirm it and it doesn't take a an > Atheist to believe it. I can relate to that story, but I wonder what reading it must be like to those who just don't understand the feeling of anxiety that occurs when you start realizing your dx is way too low. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Sat Mar 1 07:11:15 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 02:11:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200802292350.20093.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> My apology Bryan. I thought I was writing for those that correctly understood my point of view. I'm on the Extropy List..I felt free to give my opinion. I've been here for at least (very minimum) 2 years, I apologize if I offended anybody. I didn't mean to confuse anybody. PS. I still don't understand what DX means? Anna:) --- Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 29 February 2008, Anna Taylor wrote: > > My computer broke down the other day. ?I was > > petrified. ?What to do without my computer? I went > to > > see the tech guy...I got a diagnostic..didn't tell > me > > much...but poof my computer started working again. > ?I > > don't know why. ?The point of the story is that > > technology is the wave of the future and i'm sure > that > > many knowledgeable, intelligent, smart, and /or > > creative people are paying attention, it doesn't > take > > a religion to confirm it and it doesn't take a an > > Atheist to believe it. > > I can relate to that story, but I wonder what > reading it must be like to > those who just don't understand the feeling of > anxiety that occurs when > you start realizing your dx is way too low. > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 09:36:54 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 20:36:54 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Mindless Thought Experiments In-Reply-To: <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 01/03/2008, John K Clark wrote: > Somewhere in the universe there may be a language where this Email, > without changing a single character, expresses in perfect grammar the > instructions on how to operate a new type of can opener; but as neither > of us knows that language there is little danger of this conversation > being diverted into a discussion of can opener technology. It is true that this email provides can opener instructions in some possible language, but it is true only in a trivial sense. This is because the instructions are only useful if you know the language, and you can't "deduce" the language from random data unless you know what it says in the first place. Similarly, a random physical system such as atoms jostling each other in a gas might correspond to a member of the set of all possible computers simulating a can opener, but this is only useful if there is a means of decoding it: some sort of I/O device is needed, which would require a conventional computation containing at least all the information in the putative simulation to "reverse engineer". Now, what if the obscured computation at issue simulates an inputless virtual environment with conscious inhabitants? We on the outside once again will not be able to understand it or interact with it unless we do the whole computation from scratch using a conventional computer. But this should make no difference to the conscious inhabitants: they remain conscious, isolated in their virtual world. For all we know, we could be living in such a simulation, with no possibility of communication with the world "outside" our universe. -- Stathis Papaioannou From scerir at libero.it Sat Mar 1 10:23:57 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:23:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <000301c87b86$5db18bd0$de921f97@archimede> estropico wrote: > > Italy (like any other country) is unique. Part of its "uniqueness" is > > the presence of the Vatican and the power of catholic institutions. Bryan wrote: > What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they don't > have massive research institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the > only power they have is lots of listeners and a widely distributed > mental program. What does this power have to do with transhumanism? An important connection, in the past, between the Vatican and a 'sort' of transhumanism, was the 'monitum' you can read in the following page http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/dechardin.txt A famous dictum says that the opposite of a profound belief may well be another profound belief. I tend to agree, with Fabio, in that the fight 'transhumanism vs. church' is not on the top of the reasonable priorities. As Amara wrote, in another thread, 67 physicists of Rome university 'La Sapienza' (and among them the Dirac medalist Parisi) wrote a letter about and against the Pope giving a speech in that university. Unfortunately the papers published that letter. The Pope did not go there. Popularity of prof. Ratzinger reached the top. s. From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 10:49:22 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 21:49:22 +1100 Subject: [ExI] The subjectivity of entropy, the role of the observer...==> Rational metaethics In-Reply-To: <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 01/03/2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > If you know the positions and speeds of all the elements in a system, > their motion stops looking like heat, and starts looking like a > spinning flywheel - usable kinetic energy that can be extracted right > out. What if all the atoms in a monoatomic gas started vibrating in the same axis? -- Stathis Papaioannou From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 12:05:45 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 06:05:45 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Anna Taylor wrote: > My apology Bryan. ?I thought I was writing for those > that correctly understood my point of view. ?I'm on > the Extropy List..I felt free to give my opinion. ? > I've been here for at least (very minimum) 2 years, I > apologize if I offended anybody. ?I didn't mean to > confuse anybody. Huh? I thought we were in agreement? > PS. I still don't understand what DX means? The token 'dx' refers to a differential, or rate of change. It's basically the limit of the distance between the two points of a secant line as it becomes a tangent line wrt another curve. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 13:37:01 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:37:01 +0000 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > The token 'dx' refers to a differential, or rate of change. It's > basically the limit of the distance between the two points of a secant > line as it becomes a tangent line wrt another curve. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiation > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate > Well, certainly that's one meaning. :) See: I count 16 meanings for dx. Your usage is grouped at the end, under 'Other'. As readers cannot read minds, cryptic comments in emails are often difficult to decode for readers who are not familiar with the writer's normal usage. Viz. Damien's reference to hungry dieties. ;) BillK From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 15:30:17 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 08:30:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <580930c20802291354k1c616efdn3402af387fe07cfd@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <000701c87ac2$c6cb1060$36961f97@archimede> <2d6187670802290648w6c218fbfxb4c267e918ae2dbd@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802291055s1d21fdc0x28f2bce338c2493d@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670802291117l1a55addejd6e2043eb323e78e@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802291354k1c616efdn3402af387fe07cfd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803010730h43e12b1do9b0970c2ba2e2dbf@mail.gmail.com> Stefano Vaj wrote: Besides anedoctical evidence or personal inferences, and speaking of statistics, for instance, already in 1993, an international poll conducted by Daryl Macer, manager in Japan of the Eubios Ethics Institute, verified that the percentage of the general population in favour of the general availability of genetic engineering technology aimed at both preventing diseases and increasing physical and mental abilities inherited by their offspring ranged, if I am not mistaken, from 22% in Israel to 43% in the US to *83%* (!) in India. >>> I am mytified by the low numbers for Israel. I realize they have a vocal conservative population among them (as the U.S. does) but I thought on the whole it was a very technologically progressive nation. In fact, I've heard many anecdotes about how the typical Israeli is "adrift in a sea of modernity" and definitely not religiously devout. My take on Judaism (even the more orthodox and conservative forms) was that they would be much more open to "radical" biotech, etc. as compared to conservative American Evangelicals. Does anyone here know more about this matter? I considered the combination of a highly educated citizenry, the constant need to keep their already very high-tech economy competitive, the story of having been so unloved by God that they have no confirmed oil reserves on their land (as Golda Meir would joke!), and being a sliver of a country surrounded by potential enemies (and so advanced technology is key to defeating their numbers), that they would have a much more positive view of genetic engineering. I'd like to see a new poll taken to find out if the 22% positive rating has gone up significantly (since it was taken wayyyy back in 1993!, lol). And I want to have the reasons for/against also nailed down in this poll. I have a feeling that the political, military and business leaders of Israel will one way or another get the nation to invest heavily in genetic engineering so they can reap the full benefits as the technology matures. And the parents there will want their kids to have every competitive advantage available (when the gene tweaking to make humans smarter, healthier, longer lived, etc. becomes available) so the odds of personal success will be in their offspring's favor. It's hard for me to do, but I will leave out the Jewish mother jokes. : ) John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 1 16:28:02 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 10:28:02 -0600 Subject: [ExI] gravity glitches Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301102523.021cce40@satx.rr.com> sample: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 1 16:58:06 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 10:58:06 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> At 01:37 PM 3/1/2008 +0000, BillK wrote: >As readers cannot read minds, cryptic comments in emails are often >difficult to decode for readers who are not familiar with the writer's >normal usage. > >Viz. Damien's reference to hungry dieties. ;) I know, mea culpa. You start playing around with bad puns on misspelled deities and diets, and it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. Damien Broderick From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Mar 1 17:35:26 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 09:35:26 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I know, mea culpa. You start playing around with bad puns on > misspelled deities and diets, and it's all fun and games until > someone loses an eye. Wasn't lost; merely misplaced - Jef From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 17:46:51 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 09:46:51 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Mindless Thought Experiments References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com><005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Clark writes > About a week ago I sent the following to Jaron Lanier, I did not receive a > reply: > > ========= > > I read your article "Mindless Thought Experiments" at: > http://www.jaronlanier.com/aichapter.html > > I have a few comments. > ... >> so is the rainstorm conscious? We have hashed that out so many times years and so many years ago. I suppose I'm proud to have been on the cutting edge so very long ago. Jason's comments and questions are really very, very old stuff here. As far as I know, the Extropian list, and then later Wei Dai's list and SL4, were the first forums in which all this was debated at length and at a very high level. >> AI proponents usually seize on some specific stage >> in my reducto [sic] ad absurdum to locate the point >> where I've gone too far. Yeah, right. "His" reductio. (Does he use a spell-checker for his published articles?) He's just now getting around to reading Moravec? Well, perhaps not, I don't know. But it sounds that way. > I believe if you're going to attempt a reducto ad absurdum proof care must > be taken to ensure that your conclusion is contradictory and not just odd. > Einstein also came up with a thought experiment, he thought it proved that > Quantum Mechanics must be wrong because otherwise things would be odd; > not illogical, not contradictory, just odd. In the last few years this > thought experiment (Bell's Inequality) was actually performed and now we > know that things are indeed odd. Well put. Now, of course, this is not to mean to say that all these very complex questions have been totally resolved. They haven't, and they won't be for a long time. Someday, even if it were thousands of years from now, barring catastrophe or collapse, uploaded entities who run however many copies of themselves whenever they want, and who have long ago left biological substrates, will no doubt consider these questions resolved. Meanwhile, what we have done is to practice thinking about what their answers will be. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 18:03:52 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 10:03:52 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com><580930c20802291055s1d21fdc0x28f2bce338c2493d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291831.52012.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <012201c87bc6$ebd38c70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> > I wonder if Ramanujan would have counted as a transhumanist. Oh, certainly not. Now wikipedia says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan > Ramanujan's first Indian biographers describe him as rigorously orthodox. > Ramanujancredited his acumen to his family goddess, Namagiri, and looked > to her for inspiration in his work.[77] He often said, "An equation for me has > no meaning, unless it represents a thought of God."[78] [79] > G. H. Hardy cites Ramanujan as remarking that all religions seemed equally true > to him. Hardy further argued that Ramanujan's religiousness had been overstated > -- in the point of belief, not practice -- by his Indian biographers, and romanticised > by Westerners. At the same time, he remarked on Ramanujan's strict observance > of vegetarianism. Nonetheless, from reading Robert Kanigel's "The Man Who Knew Infinity" ---the best single biography I ever read---I think that Hardy was understating Ramanujan's religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices. Anyway, in my opinion, there is absolutely no correlation between mathematical genius and a tendency towards transhumanist beliefs. Or sensible philosophic beliefs at all. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 18:21:07 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 10:21:07 -0800 Subject: [ExI] "Deities" and "Patents" References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com><200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <012e01c87bc9$08fb0290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > > Are the dieties of India "jealous gods?" > > Mostly jealous of each other's chow; they are certainly *hungry* > gods, those dieties. :-) Okay, we do know your posts should be read for such fun. But it would be nice if just in the subject line folks could be more careful. We've now had a very long thread on "Pattents". And, alas, one started on "Dieties", which did merit your witty scorn. I'm sure that many, many people noticed "Pattents" is misspelled. Why didn't even one of them correct it? Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 1 18:19:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:19:36 -0600 Subject: [ExI] i before e, except after god In-Reply-To: References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301121205.024348c8@satx.rr.com> At 09:35 AM 3/1/2008 -0800, Jef wrote: > > I know, mea culpa. You start playing around with bad puns on > > misspelled deities and diets, and it's all fun and games until > > someone loses an eye. > >Wasn't lost; merely misplaced Yeah, had been going to say that, after an i.e., but just knew in me old bones that it would cause even more vexing confusion. A pun might be the shortest distance between two straight-lines, but it helps to have a laugh track of applauding old Monty Python ladies cued up, and I'm fresh out of them. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 1 18:30:20 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:30:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "Deities" and "Patents" In-Reply-To: <012e01c87bc9$08fb0290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> <012e01c87bc9$08fb0290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301122811.024bcc18@satx.rr.com> At 10:21 AM 3/1/2008 -0800, Lee wrote: >I'm sure that many, many people noticed "Pattents" is >misspelled. Why didn't even one of them correct it? Doesn't that mess up the threading? And to change it to "Patents (was: Pattents)", which I gather does retain the thread, might look insulting, perhaps? That's my excuse, anyway. Damien Broderick From estropico at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 18:48:54 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:48:54 +0000 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803011048k62f8955axaad7f6ed7a96d79a@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > ...be the Nouvelle Droite > fascist or not, if I were a "representative" of the same... You might want to update your book's website, then: "responsabile italiano del S?cretariat Etudes et Recherches del Groupement de Recherche et Etudes pour la Civilisation Europ?enne (GRECE)": http://www.biopolitica.it/biop-autore.html On the "fascist or not" and its relationship with GRECE: Wikipedia on the "New Right" (Nouvelle Droite): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouvelle_Droite Wikipedia on GRECE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRECE Cheers, Fabio From amcmr2003 at yahoo.com.br Sat Mar 1 18:35:15 2008 From: amcmr2003 at yahoo.com.br (Antonio Marcos) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:35:15 -0300 (ART) Subject: [ExI] Fruits In-Reply-To: <012e01c87bc9$08fb0290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <441364.70280.qm@web50611.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Some time ago, I've seen an article at www.fantastic-voyage.net about scientists discovering why exactly fruits is good for health, i believe it was chinese or taiwan scientists... but I cant find the article anymore, I searched the archives, the internet archive, google.. to no avail.. could someone please help find it? Mark. Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o ?nico sem limite de espa?o para armazenamento! http://br.mail.yahoo.com/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 19:19:00 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:19:00 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: <014c01c87bd1$bf8b7c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Estropico writes > On the "fascist or not" and its relationship with GRECE: Wikipedia on > the "New Right" (Nouvelle Droite): > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouvelle_Droite Well, I can certainly recognize (often) when it would take me years to get up to speed on something. No way I'm going to get a good understanding of what is being debated here. But that link has one interesting passage that really got my attention: "As Martin Lee explains, " By rejecting Christianity as an alien ideology that was forced upon the Indo-European peoples two millennia ago, French New Rightists distinguished themselves from the so-called New Right that emerged in the United States during the 1970s. Ideologically, [the European new Right group] GRECE had little in common with the American New Right, which [the European new Right ideologue] de Benoist dismissed as a puritanical, moralistic crusade that clung pathetically to Christianity as the be-all and end-all of Western civilization.[6]" Talk about mixed currents! It's as though the European coordinate system has been rotated 45 degrees from the American one. And, oh yes, the Nouvelle Droite throughout Europe does not hesitate to call into question "market practices", evidently. (Actually, I feel like apologizing for my ignorance, but I just wrote an email to someone telling them never to do that!) Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 20:23:23 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:23:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] i before e, except after god In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301121205.024348c8@satx.rr.com> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200803010605.45311.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301105414.02296e88@satx.rr.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301121205.024348c8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803011223lf861f02ia73fb0fe4582b93b@mail.gmail.com> Damien wrote: Yeah, had been going to say that, after an i.e., but just knew in me old bones that it would cause even more vexing confusion. A pun might be the shortest distance between two straight-lines, but it helps to have a laugh track of applauding old Monty Python ladies cued up, and I'm fresh out of them. >>> Yes, Damien's pun went right over my head, or around my head, or under my head, anyway..., it went somewhere! lol I grew up on Monty Python and so as a hapless American guy I need prompts such as applauding old ladies so I know when a well-educated subject of the Queen is displaying their fine sense of humor. I don't want to "look beyond the mark" and overcomplicate things. And to think just the other day I was listening to Spider Robinson's classic "Callahan's Crosstime Saloon," where in a fun scene the characters gathered together at the bar to celebrate "Punday." : ) John Grigg P.S. I can't wait to see Spamalot! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 20:42:32 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 12:42:32 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Time Magazine: Person of the Year: Putin Message-ID: <29666bf30803011242q76e9c7ceya425aef89e8a52af@mail.gmail.com> Back in December, there was much consternation on this list over Time Magazine's dubbing Vladimir Putin "Person of the Year". Now you will understand why he was chosen. BTW, it always helps to know where your media comes from. It usually comes from highly paid PR executives in the employ of the people or corporations they're shilling. PJ Published on Center for Media and Democracy (http://www.prwatch.org) Ketchum Caught "Man of the Year" Title for Putin Vladimir Putin and George Bush (July 2007 [1])Ketchum [2], the PR firm involved in the Armstrong Williams [3] "pundit payola" scandal, helped Vladimir Putin become Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2007. The firm also conducted "dozens of media briefings in Moscow, New York and Washington, D.C. for both the Russia [4]n Federation and its natural gas monopoly Gazprom [5]," reports O'Dwyer's. Ketchum was paid $845,000 for two months of work for the Russian Federation in early 2007, around the G8 [6] Summit and visits to Moscow by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice [7] and Defense Secretary Robert Gates [8]. Ketchum has a $250,000 per month contract with Gazprom; the gas company also pays the Gavin Anderson [9] firm $100,000 per month. In 2007, Ketchum's Gazprom work included "several press and think tank [10] briefings," and organizing "meetings as executives visited the U.S. in late November and early December." ________________________________ Source URL: http://www.prwatch.org/node/7021 Links: [1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Vladimir_Putin_and_George_W._Bush.jpg [2] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ketchum [3] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Armstrong_Williams [4] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Russia [5] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gazprom [6] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=G8 [7] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Condoleezza_Rice [8] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Gates [9] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gavin_Anderson [10] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=think_tank From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:03:48 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 22:03:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803011048k62f8955axaad7f6ed7a96d79a@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803011048k62f8955axaad7f6ed7a96d79a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803011303w1f749a5ah1f79e7872217ad9@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:48 PM, estropico wrote: > > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > > > ...be the Nouvelle Droite > > fascist or not, if I were a "representative" of the same... > > You might want to update your book's website, then: "responsabile > italiano del S?cretariat Etudes et Recherches del Groupement de > Recherche et Etudes pour la Civilisation Europ?enne (GRECE)": > http://www.biopolitica.it/biop-autore.html Mere sloppiness or deliberate misinformation? The truncated quote of my bio thereing reads "gi? responsabile del...", meaning "former head of...". That S?cretariat in fact has not even existed for more than twenty-five years now. As for the quality of the work performed by the same, the number of Nobelists involved at that time in the publications of GRECE is a good enough testimony of what it could achieve before its deplorable conservative turn, which led on the other hand to Mr. de Benoist's regular invitations as a speaker by the Italian post-fascist environments supported by your friends and yourself. Stefano Vaj From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:14:35 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 14:14:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Time Magazine: Person of the Year: Putin In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803011242q76e9c7ceya425aef89e8a52af@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803011242q76e9c7ceya425aef89e8a52af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803011314q2b5838ffq1d3c8bc2441eb7dd@mail.gmail.com> I personally think Putin was a good choice for the "Man of the Year" Time magazine title. Whether for good or bad, he has had a nearly overwhelming influence on modern Russia, one of the most powerful nations in the world. And not all the people who have gotten this title over the years have been saints. But the way this all came about is another story, entirely. My question is..., were any real laws broken during this successful effort to boost Putin's name? Or was this just global big business/public relations doing things "business as usual" in an ethical gray zone where spotlights are rarely brought to bear. I had no idea PR firm executives could make such large sums of money! lol And so I guess a Master's degree in public relations is on par with a law degree if your career takes the right trajectory. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:20:50 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:20:50 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan In-Reply-To: <012201c87bc6$ebd38c70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291831.52012.kanzure@gmail.com> <012201c87bc6$ebd38c70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803011520.50729.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Nonetheless, from reading Robert Kanigel's "The Man Who Knew > Infinity" ---the best single biography I ever read---I think that > Hardy was understating Ramanujan's religious beliefs, attitudes, and > practices. I never did read Kanigel's book all the way through (got distracted with "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" half way through, you see), but I did pick up a few interesting quotes which I think illustrate some of the transhumanist mindset, for example: > His work was the work from which most of us would shrink. There's > admiration there, but maybe a wisp of derision, too--as if in wonder > that Ramanujan, of all people, could stoop so willingly to the realm > of the merely arithmetical. And yet, Ramanujan was doing what great > artists always do--diving into his material. He was building an > intimacy with numbers, for the same reason that the painter lingers > over the mixing of his paints, or the musician endlessly practices his > scales. And his insight profited. For him, it wasn't what his equation > stood for that mattered, but the equation itself, as pattern and form. > And his pleasure lay not in finding in it a numerical answer, but from > turning it upside down and inside out, seeing in it new possibilities, > playing with it as the poet does words and images, the artist color > and line, the philosopher ideas. Ramanujan's world was one in which > numbers had properties built into them. Chemistry students learn the > properties of the various elements, the positions in the periodic > table they occupy, the classes to which they belong, and just how > their chemical properties arise from their atomic structure. Numbers, > too, have properties which place them in distinct classes and > categories. Ramanujan was an artist. And numbers--and the mathematical > language expressing their relationship--were his medium ... > Ramanujan's was no cool, steady Intelligence, solemnly applied to the > problem at hand; he was all energy, animation, force. He had a > determination to succeed and to sacrifice everything in the attempt. > That could be a prescription for an unhappy life; certainly for a life > out of balance, sneering at timidity and restraint. Sometimes, as > Ramanujan sat or squatted on the pial, he'd look up to watch the > children playing in the street with what one neighbor remembered as 'a > blank and vacant look.' But inside, he was on fire. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:23:47 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:23:47 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "Deities" and "Patents" In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080301122811.024bcc18@satx.rr.com> References: <418536.78547.qm@web30402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <012e01c87bc9$08fb0290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080301122811.024bcc18@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803011523.47665.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > Doesn't that mess up the threading? In some cases. I have my email client on maxium threadability, whatever that means. So sometimes I get completely new threads attached below a message somewhere. Maybe this is because somebody is replying to a previous message from the list instead of writing a new email? Or in some cases, Amara's messages are misplaced as new threads. Odd problems. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:21:37 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 22:21:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <014c01c87bd1$bf8b7c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <014c01c87bd1$bf8b7c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803011321o5ec4fbfdu7ee8fb9bd6c1a34a@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Talk about mixed currents! It's as though the European coordinate system > has been rotated 45 degrees from the American one. > > And, oh yes, the Nouvelle Droite throughout Europe does not hesitate > to call into question "market practices", evidently. (Actually, I feel like > apologizing for my ignorance, but I just wrote an email to someone > telling them never to do that!) All in all, what you say is basically correct. On the other hand, the French environment that is now known as the Nouvelle Droite has unfortunately picked up along the way many themes and attitudes that belong to the worst kind of neoluddite and technophobic New Left. Therefore, they may well have emphatically avoided being neocons or authoritarians or nazis, but at the same time have ended up being unpleasantly close to Mr. Rifkin's or Mr. N?ss's ideas. In fact, many intellectuals who used to belong to that area and were closer, often ante litteram, to transhumanist ideas, such as Yves Christen (Les ann?es Faust, ou, La science face au vieillissement) or Charles Champetier (http://www.lesmutants.com), simply left quite soon when the GRECE turned conservative and at the same time turned mostly its back to science and technology along "gauchiste" refrains. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 21:32:51 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 22:32:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803010730h43e12b1do9b0970c2ba2e2dbf@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <000701c87ac2$c6cb1060$36961f97@archimede> <2d6187670802290648w6c218fbfxb4c267e918ae2dbd@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802291055s1d21fdc0x28f2bce338c2493d@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670802291117l1a55addejd6e2043eb323e78e@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802291354k1c616efdn3402af387fe07cfd@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670803010730h43e12b1do9b0970c2ba2e2dbf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803011332l1bb1d9d3ga8f98cfd6c2b71cf@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 4:30 PM, John Grigg wrote: > I am mytified by the low numbers for Israel. I realize they have a vocal > conservative population among them (as the U.S. does) but I thought on the > whole it was a very technologically progressive nation. In fact, I've heard > many anecdotes about how the typical Israeli is "adrift in a sea of > modernity" and definitely not religiously devout. My take on Judaism (even > the more orthodox and conservative forms) was that they would be much more > open to "radical" biotech, etc. as compared to conservative American > Evangelicals. Does anyone here know more about this matter? > While I suspect that Israel has its own fair share of religious fundamentalists, and that opposition to H+ ideas may not be limited to the same, I know for instance that Israel has, or used to have, special schools for, and research programmes on, "superdotati" (specially-endowed? super-intelligent? high IQ?) children, where such things have been unthinkable in Europe, and AFAIK not exactly the most politically correct idea in the US either, for a long while. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 21:46:38 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:46:38 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291831.52012.kanzure@gmail.com> <012201c87bc6$ebd38c70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803011520.50729.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <015601c87be5$cdd7ac50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes > On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: >> Nonetheless, from reading Robert Kanigel's "The Man Who Knew >> Infinity" ---the best single biography I ever read---I think that >> Hardy was understating Ramanujan's religious beliefs, attitudes, and >> practices. > > I never did read Kanigel's book all the way through (got distracted > with "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" half way through, you see), but I > did pick up a few interesting quotes which I think illustrate some of > the transhumanist mindset, for example: All that (below) just seems really like anyone who loves his work, or is highly fascinated by something. There is nothing characteristically transhumanist (or even philosophical) that I can see. Lee >> His work was the work from which most of us would shrink. There's >> admiration there, but maybe a wisp of derision, too--as if in wonder >> that Ramanujan, of all people, could stoop so willingly to the realm >> of the merely arithmetical. And yet, Ramanujan was doing what great >> artists always do--diving into his material. He was building an >> intimacy with numbers, for the same reason that the painter lingers >> over the mixing of his paints, or the musician endlessly practices his >> scales. And his insight profited. For him, it wasn't what his equation >> stood for that mattered, but the equation itself, as pattern and form. >> And his pleasure lay not in finding in it a numerical answer, but from >> turning it upside down and inside out, seeing in it new possibilities, >> playing with it as the poet does words and images, the artist color >> and line, the philosopher ideas. Ramanujan's world was one in which >> numbers had properties built into them. Chemistry students learn the >> properties of the various elements, the positions in the periodic >> table they occupy, the classes to which they belong, and just how >> their chemical properties arise from their atomic structure. Numbers, >> too, have properties which place them in distinct classes and >> categories. Ramanujan was an artist. And numbers--and the mathematical >> language expressing their relationship--were his medium ... >> Ramanujan's was no cool, steady Intelligence, solemnly applied to the >> problem at hand; he was all energy, animation, force. He had a >> determination to succeed and to sacrifice everything in the attempt. >> That could be a prescription for an unhappy life; certainly for a life >> out of balance, sneering at timidity and restraint. Sometimes, as >> Ramanujan sat or squatted on the pial, he'd look up to watch the >> children playing in the street with what one neighbor remembered as 'a >> blank and vacant look.' But inside, he was on fire. > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 22:16:44 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 16:16:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan In-Reply-To: <015601c87be5$cdd7ac50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011520.50729.kanzure@gmail.com> <015601c87be5$cdd7ac50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803011616.44698.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > All that (below) just seems really like anyone who loves his > work, or is highly fascinated by something. There is nothing > characteristically transhumanist (or even philosophical) that > I can see. Math, philosophy, logic, reason, numbers, these are all tightly intertwingled subjects, and I believe stepwise lead to transhumanism or at least futurism, context-exploration, and realizing the future by creating it. In this context, Ramanujan was an amazing journeyman in such explorations, able to map out more territory that should have been possible with the limiting circumstances he was born into, and isn't this transcension? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 22:26:26 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 23:26:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem Message-ID: <580930c20803011426x6d60f3d5x9651fa19f95c1cda@mail.gmail.com> Basically, DNA is a computing problem The revolution of genome sequencing has spawned a parallel revolution in computing, as scientists in Cambridge have found The computing resources of the Sanger Institute at Hinxton, near Cambridge, are almost unfathomable. Three rooms are filled with walls of blade servers and drives, and there is a fourth that is kept fallow, and for the moment full of every sort of debris: old Sun workstations, keyboards, cases and cases of backup tapes - even a dishwasher. But the fallow room is an important part of the centre's preparations. Things are changing so fast that they can have no idea what they will be required to do in a year's time. When Tony Cox, now the institute's head of sequencing informatics, was a post-doctoral researcher he could sequence 200 bases of DNA in a day (human DNA has about 3bn bases). The machines being installed today can do 1m bases an hour. What will be installed in two years' time is anyone's guess, but the centre is as ready as it can be. Invisible revolution Genome sequencing, which is what the centre excels at, has wrought a revolution in biology that many people think they understand. But it has happened alongside a largely invisible revolution, in which molecular biology - which even 20 years ago was done in glassware inside laboratories - is now done in silicon. A modern sequencer itself is a fairly powerful computer. The new machines being brought online at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute are robots from waist-height upwards, where the machinery grows and then treats microscopic specks of DNA in serried ranks so that a laser can illuminate it and a moving camera capture the fluorescing bases every two seconds. The lower half of each cabinet holds the computers needed to coordinate the machinery and do the preliminary processing of the camera pictures. At the heart of the machine is a plate of treated glass about the size of an ordinary microscope slide, which contains around 30m copies of 2,640 tiny fragments of DNA, all arranged in eight lines along the glass, and all with the bases at their tips being directly read off by a laser. To one side is a screen which displays the results. The sequencing cabinet pumps out 2MB of this image data every second for each two-hour run. With 27 of the new machines running full tilt, each one will produce a terabyte every three days. Cox was astonished when he did the preliminary calculations. "It was quite a simple back-of-the envelope calculation: right, we've got this many machines, and they're producing this much data, and we need to hold it for this amount of time and we sort of looked at it and thought: oh, shit, that's 320TB!" Think of it as the biggest Linux swap partition in the world, since the whole system is running on Debian Linux. The genome project uses open source software as much as possible, and one of its major databases is run on MySQL, although others rely on Oracle. "History has shown," says Cox, "that when we have created - it used to be 20TB or 30TB, maybe - of sequencing data, for the longer term storage, then you may need 10 times that in terms of real estate, and computational process, to analyse and compare and all the things that you want to do with it. So having produced something in the order of 100TB to 200TB of sequential data, then the layer beyond that, the scratch space, and the sequential analysis, and so on - to be honest, we are still teasing out what that means, but it's not going to be small." Down in the rooms where the servers are farmed you must raise your voice to be heard above the fans. A wall of disk drives about 3m long and 2m high holds that 320TB of data. In the next aisle stands a similarly sized wall of blade servers with 640 cores, though no one can remember exactly how many CPUs are involved. "We moved into this building with about 300TB of storage real estate, full stop," says Phil Butcher, the head of IT. "Now we have gone up to about a petabyte and a half, and the last 320 of that was just to put this pipeline together." This new technology is the basis for a new kind of genomics, with really frightening implications. The ballyhooed first draft of the Human Genome Sequence in 2000 was a hybrid of many people's DNA; like scripture, it is authoritative, but not accurate. Now the Sanger Institute is gearing up for its part in a project to sequence accurately 1,000 individual human genomes, so that all of their differences can be mapped. The idea is to identify every single variation in human DNA that occurs in 0.5% or more of the population sampled. This will require one of the biggest software efforts in the world today. Although it is only very rare conditions that are caused by single gene defects, almost all common conditions are affected by a complex interplay of factors along the genome, and the Thousand Genome Project is the first attempt to identify the places involved in these weak interactions. This won't be tied to any of the individual donors, who will all be anonymous. But mapping all the places where human genomes differ is the first necessary step towards deciding which differences are significant, and of what. There are three sorts of differences between your DNA - or mine, or anyone's - and the sequence identified in the human genome project. There are the SNPs, where a single base change can be identified; these are often significant, and are certainly the easiest things to spot. Beyond that are the changes affecting tens of bases at a time: insertions and deletions within genes; finally there are the changes which can affect relatively long strings of DNA, whole genes or stretches between genes, which may be copied or deleted in different numbers. The last of these are going to be extremely hard to spot, since the DNA must be sequenced in fragments that may be shorter than the duplications themselves. "It's a bit like one of those spot the difference things," Cox says. "If you have 1,000 copies, it's very much easier to spot the smallest differences between them." Genome me? All of the work of identifying these changes along the 3bn bases of the genome must be done in software and - since the changes involved are so rare - each fragment of every genome must be sequenced between 11 and 30 times to be sure that the differences the software finds are real and not just errors in measurement. But there's no doubt that all this will be accomplished. The project is a milestone towards genome-based medicine, in which individual patients could be sequenced as a matter of course. Once that happens, the immense volumes of data that the Sanger Institute is gearing up to handle will become commonplace. But the project is unique in that it must not just deal with huge volumes of data, but keep all of it easily accessible so different parts can quickly be compared with each other. At this point, the old sort of science is almost entirely irrelevant. "It now has come out of the labs and into the domain of informatics," Butcher says. The Sanger Institute, he says, is no longer just competing for scientists. It is about to embark on this huge Linux project just at the time that the rest of the world has discovered how reliable and useful it can be, so that they have to compete with banks and other employers for people who can manage huge clusters with large-scale distributed file systems. Perhaps the threatened recession will have one useful side effect, by freeing up programmers to work in science rather than the City. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/28/research.computing -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 22:27:04 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 14:27:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Time Magazine: Person of the Year: Putin In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803011314q2b5838ffq1d3c8bc2441eb7dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803011242q76e9c7ceya425aef89e8a52af@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670803011314q2b5838ffq1d3c8bc2441eb7dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803011427k3fcc943ekf5ba5abe12afb6a4@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 1:14 PM, John Grigg wrote: > But the way this all came about is another story, entirely. My question > is..., were any real laws broken during this successful effort to boost > Putin's name? Or was this just global big business/public relations doing > things "business as usual" in an ethical gray zone where spotlights are > rarely brought to bear. Business as usual. They will never be made illegal, because the people who benefit most are those most influencing our laws. > I had no idea PR firm executives could make such > large sums of money! lol And so I guess a Master's degree in public > relations is on par with a law degree if your career takes the right > trajectory. Honestly, if you're talented and high up the food chain, PR can make law salaries look like chump change. In our country, the really rich, successful PR execs morph into lobbyists and campaign strategists. And I can tell you they didn't make their fortunes lobbying on behalf of Greenpeace or Planned Parenthood. ;-) PJ From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Sat Mar 1 22:06:12 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 22:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I'm sorry if the following post sounds in anyway anti-Bryan, but his posts have been the most dismissive towards religious influence recently. I'm going to mention why I think we should pay attention to religion and how it views transhumanism. Bryan said " They certainly don't have supercomputers, they don't have massive research institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to do with transhumanism?" Well, if they decide that some transhumanist ideas or methods are incompatible with their code of ethics, they will use that mental program to try and influence as many people as possible. This includes many lapsed catholics without a particularly strong interest in science, who when pushed on a bioethical topic may go "I don't know! I guess it sounds a bit contrary to what I was taught as a child, so I suppose I'm a little bit against transhumanist technology X". Italy, like most developed countries, is a representative democracy. This means laws are made, and taxes spent, by people who's career depends on chasing votes. If enough Italian politicians decide that chasing the catholic vote is more important than letting some biological research facility or experimental medical clinic do what it wants, then transhuman progress in that country may be seriously held back. The US ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research didn't hold back the field as much as some feared, but the prospect of labs being banned from performing certain research is very real. Bryan also said "The religious institutions are not doing ES cell nor GMO research." This is true, but they *are* funding think tanks which comment on these lines of research and lobby politicians with their point of view on how these things should be licensed. Your ES cell or GMO research group would like to allowed to legally earn a living without risking jail or being closed down. Bryan also said "we're increasingly able to do research without financial cost (more "DIY")." DIY research still depends on being allowed to do it legally. If your research requires iodine, red phosphorous or hydrochloric gas you risk DEA investigation in the US, as the link below makes clear. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/csa/872.htm If the war on terror becomes the war on bio-terror, anyone doing home biotech research risks being locked up without trial. I think it was in Greg Bear's "Quantico" where he painted a picture of a US filled with terrorism, where even vineyards were closely monitored for their biotech fermentation equipment, and the FBI was furiously trying to contain biotech. I must admit, I've always liked the idea of DIY biotech research, and would love to become a "wetware hacker" of sorts, but I think in the UK I'd be breaking a huge number of laws. I can imagine a future in which me and Bryan are sat in the Guantanamo Bay rehabilitation facility for suspected bioterrorists, being played lectures on Intelligent Design over and over again until we confess that genetics is a lie and god made the human race perfect, and please may we have a phone call? I was going to finish by commenting on remarks about Italy's low birthrate despite the catholic church's opinion on contraception, but as I was typing discovered there was no way I could do this without making a large number of potentially offensive remarks all based on a couple of highly dubious magazine articles which selectively reported statistics about sexual behaviour around the world. You have to love the British media, they'll use sex to sell anything, but I wouldn't want to rely on their statistics. Tom ___________________________________________________________ Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 23:24:38 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:24:38 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803011724.38240.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Tom Nowell wrote: > I'm sorry if the following post sounds in anyway > anti-Bryan, but his posts have been the most > dismissive towards religious influence recently. I'm > going to mention why I think we should pay attention > to religion and how it views transhumanism. Just to make sure, you do understand that I am not dismissive of religions at all, merely in terms of making "transhumanism" a reality, such as making futurist technologies realized, since *not* paying attention to religion does not influence the bottomline technicality of the technologies involved. Otherwise, it's an amazing cultural phenomena and much more. > Bryan said " They certainly don't have supercomputers, > they don't have massive research institutions, > they don't have neurofarms, the only power they have > is lots of listeners and a widely distributed > mental program. What does this power have to do with > transhumanism?" > Well, if they decide that some transhumanist ideas or > methods are incompatible with their code of ethics, > they will use that mental program to try and influence > as many people as possible. This includes many lapsed > catholics without a particularly strong interest in > science, who when pushed on a bioethical topic may go > "I don't know! I guess it sounds a bit contrary > to what I was taught as a child, so I suppose I'm a > little bit against transhumanist technology X". No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility does not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they can protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to burn us alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over the internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It will route around the damage. > Italy, like most developed countries, is a > representative democracy. This means laws are made, > and taxes spent, by people who's career depends on > chasing votes. If enough Italian politicians decide > that chasing the catholic vote is more important than > letting some biological research facility or > experimental medical clinic do what it wants, then > transhuman progress in that country may be seriously > held back. The US ban on federal funding of embryonic > stem cell research didn't hold back the field as much > as some feared, but the prospect of labs being banned > from performing certain research is very real. Thought police fail, and so will fabrication police, it'd be like trying to control the whole sum of biological innovation occuring at the bacterial level, which is a near impossibility -- just like killing an evil man does not kill Satan (for the sake of brevity of point). So just because the State declares it "illegal", what does this mean? Really? > Your ES cell or GMO research group would like to > allowed to legally earn a living without risking jail > or being closed down. Yes, they'd like that. And what if they can't? Then I guess they, by definition, wouldn't be the ES/GMO research group then, right? Time to move in some more interested parties in performing that research ... > Bryan also said "we're > increasingly able to do research without financial > cost (more "DIY")." DIY research still depends on > being allowed to do it legally. If your research You are wrong. Look at the DIY malacious software industry. That's completely illegal. And it works. > requires iodine, red phosphorous or hydrochloric gas > you risk DEA investigation in the US, as the link > below makes clear. Hm, that's an interesting problem, but I think that we can come up with interesting ways of getting the chemicals we need -- after all, there must be a source for these chemicals and resources, right? > If the war on terror becomes the war on bio-terror, > anyone doing home biotech research risks being locked > up without trial. I think it was in Greg Bear's Writing certain words, thinking certain thoughts -- no, this is usually completely untraceable. It's when you start telling people, when you become "on the grid" (as I have); it's when you leave enough clues and a trail for some seriously intense detectives to trace everything back to you. Otherwise there's little risk. > "Quantico" where he painted a picture of a US filled > with terrorism, where even vineyards were closely > monitored for their biotech fermentation equipment, > and the FBI was furiously trying to contain biotech. I saw Greg Bear on television a few months ago, he was surprised that there wasn't more high school students doing biotech and related engineering yet, and he's right that it will probably change pretty soon. I should go get the book. Sounds interesting. > I must admit, I've always liked the idea of DIY > biotech research, and would love to become a "wetware > hacker" of sorts, but I think in the UK I'd be > breaking a huge number of laws. I can imagine a future Then are you also breaking the law by unknowingly increasingly applying selective pressures on germs and bacteria via applying chemicals to kill them (such as hand sanitizers, soap, etc.)? > in which me and Bryan are sat in the Guantanamo Bay > rehabilitation facility for suspected bioterrorists, http://biohack.sf.net/ <-- I am probably already on their list. > being played lectures on Intelligent Design over and > over again until we confess that genetics is a lie and > god made the human race perfect, and please may we > have a phone call? On that note, who the hell are you supposed to call if you get locked up in Gitmo? Not just any regular lawyer, surely. A super lawyer, perhaps? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 1 23:27:01 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:27:01 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem In-Reply-To: <580930c20803011426x6d60f3d5x9651fa19f95c1cda@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20803011426x6d60f3d5x9651fa19f95c1cda@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803011727.01574.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > A modern sequencer itself is a fairly powerful computer. The new > machines being brought online at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute > are robots from waist-height upwards, where the machinery grows and > then treats microscopic specks of DNA in serried ranks so that a > laser can illuminate it and a moving camera capture the fluorescing > bases every two seconds. The lower half of each cabinet holds the > computers needed to coordinate the machinery and do the preliminary > processing of the camera pictures. At the heart of the machine is a > plate of treated glass about the size of an ordinary microscope > slide, which contains around 30m copies of 2,640 tiny fragments of > DNA, all arranged in eight lines along the glass, and all with the > bases at their tips being directly read off by a laser. It is my understanding that it is a bit more complicated than that, not just fluorescent laser spectroscopy, but rather some sort of gel electrophoresis system where the DNA strands are ran down all at once and then you correlate massive datasets together to figure out where all of the DNA molecules were in synch or where they weren't, and stuff like that. I'd like to be wrong - I hope it's as easy as a laser reading each individual nucleotide reporter. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 1 23:26:59 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:26:59 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011520.50729.kanzure@gmail.com> <015601c87be5$cdd7ac50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803011616.44698.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <018b01c87bf4$2c5c9200$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes > On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > All that (below) just seems really like anyone who loves his > > work, or is highly fascinated by something. There is nothing > > characteristically transhumanist (or even philosophical) that > > I can see. > > Math, philosophy, logic, reason, numbers, these are all tightly > intertwingled subjects, and I believe stepwise lead to > transhumanism or at least futurism, context-exploration, and > realizing the future by creating it. Well, there are many, many people who are totally into math, philosophy, logic, reason and number, but who abhor anything even remotely connected with longevity research, cryonics, expanding human capabilities, and---hold your breath--- technology (!). And I don't think that those things are as intertwined as you do. Lots of math fiends, for example, totally disdain anything philosophical. Now exactly how they can be like this beats me, but that's the way it is. One of the most shocking things that ever happened to me was that my bosom buddies who I knew between age 20 and 30, who lived in southern California, who were epitomes of philosophical erudition, good taste, interests in math and science---were completely uninterested when (when we were about 40) the new advent of cryonics, later ideas of David Pearce (www.hedweb.com), and talk of the singularity. I was baffled, and still am. > In this context, Ramanujan was an amazing journeyman in > such explorations, able to map out more territory that > should [not] have been possible with the limiting circumstances > he was born into, and isn't this transcension? He was totally amazing, all right, but only in the narrow area of pure math. I expect that if he'd been born in the West, or in India now, he would have turned into a much more conventional---but still tremendously, tremendously good --- regular mathematician. I think that Hardy thought so too. Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 00:16:35 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:16:35 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan In-Reply-To: <018b01c87bf4$2c5c9200$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011616.44698.kanzure@gmail.com> <018b01c87bf4$2c5c9200$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803011816.35532.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Bryan writes > > On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > > All that (below) just seems really like anyone who loves his > > > work, or is highly fascinated by something. There is nothing > > > characteristically transhumanist (or even philosophical) that > > > I can see. > > > > Math, philosophy, logic, reason, numbers, these are all tightly > > intertwingled subjects, and I believe stepwise lead to > > transhumanism or at least futurism, context-exploration, and > > realizing the future by creating it. > > Well, there are many, many people who are totally into math, > philosophy, logic, reason and number, but who abhor anything > even remotely connected with longevity research, cryonics, > expanding human capabilities, and---hold your breath--- > technology (!). And I don't think that those things are as > intertwined as you do. Lots of math fiends, for example, > totally disdain anything philosophical. Technology, when broken down to its elemental forms, can mean anything from the integral symbol to the device that brings back the (nearly) dead. Is the mathematician not an inventer of technologies, just as the longevitist, the cryonicist, the programmer or logician? If they want to refute the well-studied connections between philosophy and mathematics, and computation (i.e., pick self-representation), they may try, of course, and they may despise it, yes, but how does that make it any less true or false whether they give their support or not? Lee, are you making an argument from authority? > Now exactly how they can be like this beats me, but that's Oh, are you claiming that since they reject technologies, they are not transhumanist? Since they have such a specialized niche that they cut themselves off? Arguably, the transhumanist problem space can be mapped to other niches and environments in ideaspace, and therefore there are other representations of transhumanists than simply those who verbally reject technology (no matter how much they like their own biological technology, *ahem* self-replication?). > the way it is. One of the most shocking things that ever > happened to me was that my bosom buddies who I knew > between age 20 and 30, who lived in southern California, > who were epitomes of philosophical erudition, good taste, > interests in math and science---were completely uninterested > when (when we were about 40) the new advent of cryonics, > later ideas of David Pearce (www.hedweb.com), and talk > of the singularity. I was baffled, and still am. I am reminded of the shock levels mentioned on sl4.org, perhaps an ontology of transhumanists can be developed, such that there are certain transhumanist-journeymen who can handle a certain shock level? Wasn't this the idea of "levels of transcension" in Orion's Arm? > > In this context, Ramanujan was an amazing journeyman in > > such explorations, able to map out more territory that > > should [not] have been possible with the limiting circumstances > > he was born into, and isn't this transcension? > > He was totally amazing, all right, but only in the narrow area > of pure math. I expect that if he'd been born in the West, > or in India now, he would have turned into a much more > conventional---but still tremendously, tremendously good > --- regular mathematician. I think that Hardy thought so too. I am not saying that he would have otherwise transcended via technological replacement of his body or anything like that, I know I can't make that argument nor do I want to. But instead I am suggesting that there is some commonality in the problem space that he worked in, and it is that which makes him somewhat transhumanist. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 01:03:56 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:03:56 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011616.44698.kanzure@gmail.com> <018b01c87bf4$2c5c9200$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803011816.35532.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <019601c87c01$4dac2d00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes >> Well, there are many, many people who are totally into math, >> philosophy, logic, reason and number, but who abhor anything >> even remotely connected with longevity research, cryonics, >> expanding human capabilities, and---hold your breath--- >> technology (!). And I don't think that those things are as >> intertwined as you do. Lots of math fiends, for example, >> totally disdain anything philosophical. > > Technology, when broken down to its elemental forms, can mean anything > from the integral symbol to the device that brings back the (nearly) > dead. Is the mathematician not an inventer of technologies, just as the > longevitist, the cryonicist, the programmer or logician? It seems to me that you are using some words very non-standardly. Pure math, for example, is never considered technology. You should not use "technology" to > mean anything from the integral symbol to the device that brings > back the (nearly) dead. on pain of simply being misunderstood by practically everybody. > If they [some people] want to refute the well-studied connections > between philosophy and mathematics, and computation The people who love math and despise philosophical activity are hardly interested in *refuting* any such thing. That would be philosophy, after all. And as a subject, philsophy is so broad, that many philosophers simply are totally uninterested in math or technology (beyond, as you say, that it serves them well enough to keep the electricity flowing so that they can read). > ...and they may despise it, yes, but how does that make it > any less true or false whether they give their support or not? I agree. Relationships and truth, of course, do not depend on anyone's support, recognition, or agreement. >> Now exactly how they can be like this beats me, but that's > > Oh, are you claiming that since they reject technologies, they are not > transhumanist? Since they have such a specialized niche that they cut > themselves off? Yes, and yes. > Arguably, the transhumanist problem space can be mapped > to other niches and environments in ideaspace, and therefore there are > other representations of transhumanists than simply those who verbally > reject technology (no matter how much they like their own biological > technology, *ahem* self-replication?). I suppose that anything can be mapped to anything. The play Hamlet can probably be mapped to fourier analysis in one way or another. And I would not be completely shocked if someone who was an expert on Hamlet and also really, really loved fourier analysis spoke of connections he saw. But that would be merely a reflection of how his own brain mapped things. In high school I loved math and chess, and I swear, I used the very same neurons for both. I simply could not understand how some people could be very good in one, and be terrible, try as they might, in the other. But for me to have said that chess is very mathematical would have been a mistake. >> He was totally amazing, all right, but only in the narrow area >> of pure math. I expect that if he'd been born in the West, >> or in India now, he would have turned into a much more >> conventional---but still tremendously, tremendously good >> --- regular mathematician. I think that Hardy thought so too. > > I am not saying that he would have otherwise transcended via > technological replacement of his body or anything like that, I know I > can't make that argument nor do I want to. But instead I am suggesting > that there is some commonality in the problem space that he worked in, > and it is that which makes him somewhat transhumanist. The commonality you see between Ramanujan's math on the one hand, and transhumanist concerns and investigations on the other, really, I contend, just reflect the way *you* think. There is no real commonality. Except maybe the very, very common human urges to understand and to create, which typify intelligent people everywhere (and even some not so intelligent ones). Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 01:25:03 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:25:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) Message-ID: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I have a question for people who know about transistor circuits. On page 56 of Horowitz and Hill's classic "The Art of Electronics", there is a nice description of the emitter follower circuit. The following is used as an example: The bottom of the diagram is at -10 volts and the top is at +10 volts (i.e. a 20volt supply somewhere). Just above the -10 volts is a 1K resistor, and above that the emitter of an NPN transistor. There is no resistor between the collector and the +10 volts. The experiment is to let the base voltage (input) vary between +10 and -10. The output is taken (hence "emitter-follower") at the top of the 1K resistor. Because the base-emitter voltage is always around .6 volts, the output naturally follows the input, but at .6 volts less. But the book says that when the input voltage drops down to -4.4 volts, the base-emitter junction gets back-biased, (and the transistor turns off?). I don't understand why the voltage on the base cannot keep going down, say to -6V, with the output voltage continuing to keep in step, say at -6.6. Even at -6 volts, there seems to me to be plenty of leeway between that and the -10V source below it. Here is their explanation: "The output can swing to within a transistor saturation voltage drop of VCC (about +9.9v) but it cannot go more negative than -5 volts. That is because on the extreme negative swing the transistor can do no more than turn off, which it does at -4.4 volts input (-5V output). Further netgative swing at the input results in back-biasing of the base-emitter juntion, but no further change in output." I still don't see why the base could not be at, say, -6v and the output .6 lower. Why should the base-emitter junction be back-biased when there is still a big voltage difference between the base and the -10 volts at bottom? Thanks, Lee From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Mar 2 02:58:04 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:58:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I have a question for people who know about transistor > circuits. On page 56 of Horowitz and Hill's classic "The Art > of Electronics", there is a nice description of the emitter > follower circuit. The following is used as an example: > > The bottom of the diagram is at -10 volts and the top is at > +10 volts (i.e. a 20volt supply somewhere). Just above the > -10 volts is a 1K resistor, and above that the emitter of an > NPN transistor. There is no resistor between the collector > and the +10 volts. The experiment is to let the base voltage > (input) vary between +10 and -10. The output is taken > (hence "emitter-follower") at the top of the 1K resistor. > > Because the base-emitter voltage is always around .6 volts, > the output naturally follows the input, but at .6 volts less. > > But the book says that when the input voltage drops down > to -4.4 volts, the base-emitter junction gets back-biased, > (and the transistor turns off?). I don't understand why the > voltage on the base cannot keep going down, say to -6V, > with the output voltage continuing to keep in step, say at > -6.6. Even at -6 volts, there seems to me to be plenty > of leeway between that and the -10V source below it. > > Here is their explanation: > > "The output can swing to within a transistor saturation > voltage drop of VCC (about +9.9v) but it cannot go > more negative than -5 volts. That is because on the > extreme negative swing the transistor can do no more > than turn off, which it does at -4.4 volts input (-5V > output). Further netgative swing at the input results in > back-biasing of the base-emitter juntion, but no further > change in output." > > I still don't see why the base could not be at, say, -6v > and the output .6 lower. Why should the base-emitter > junction be back-biased when there is still a big voltage > difference between the base and the -10 volts at bottom? > Lee - You didn't mention the value of the load impedance, but if it were equal to the emitter resistor value, then you would in effect have a voltage divider putting the emitter at approximately -5V, and (when the transistor is forward-biased) the base at approximately -4.4. Wow, this takes me back more than a few years. Does this answer your question? Does this topic belong on the Extropy list? - Jef From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 03:24:08 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 21:24:08 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803012124.08718.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > Does this topic belong on the Extropy list? If not, there's piclist. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 03:25:55 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 21:25:55 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803012125.55457.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > But the book says that when the input voltage drops down > to -4.4 volts, the base-emitter junction gets back-biased, > (and the transistor turns off?). ?I don't understand why the > voltage on the base cannot keep going down, say to -6V, > with the output voltage continuing to keep in step, say at > -6.6. ?Even at -6 volts, there seems to me to be plenty > of leeway between that and the -10V source below it. I was recently brushing up on my understanding of transistor tech, and while my understanding isn't of the same nature that Jef portrays, it was my interpretation that transistors throw off because of the restriction to the amount of electrons that can flow through due to the field effect generated by the incoming electrons from the base. If its voltage was to drop, I think that would mean that the field would become inverted, thus not allowing anything to travel through any of the doped material. But this is my layman interpretation. Consult Jef. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Mar 2 03:30:03 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 19:30:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: <200803012124.08718.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803012124.08718.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Saturday 01 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > > Does this topic belong on the Extropy list? > > If not, there's piclist. I saw the question as directly relevant to the typical disconnect between Lee and me: it's another example of blindness to the importance and ubiquity of context (any description of the behavior of a system is incomplete without accounting also for its environment.) But as a question of basic transistor circuit theory I fail to see its relevance to this list. - Jef From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Mar 2 03:34:20 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 19:34:20 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: <200803012125.55457.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803012125.55457.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > I was recently brushing up on my understanding of transistor tech, and > while my understanding isn't of the same nature that Jef portrays, it > was my interpretation that transistors throw off because of the > restriction to the amount of electrons that can flow through due to the > field effect generated by the incoming electrons from the base. If its > voltage was to drop, I think that would mean that the field would > become inverted, thus not allowing anything to travel through any of > the doped material. But this is my layman interpretation. Note that the example was of an emitter-follower using not an FET but a silicon junction transistor. > Consult Jef. Please don't. Transistor circuits ceased to be of much interest to me 30 years ago. - Jef - Jef From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 03:55:40 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 21:55:40 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan In-Reply-To: <019601c87c01$4dac2d00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011816.35532.kanzure@gmail.com> <019601c87c01$4dac2d00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803012155.40909.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 01 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > Technology, when broken down to its elemental forms, can mean > > anything from the integral symbol to the device that brings back > > the (nearly) dead. Is the mathematician not an inventer of > > technologies, just as the longevitist, the cryonicist, the > > programmer or logician? > > It seems to me that you are using some words very non-standardly. > Pure math, for example, is never considered technology. You should > not use "technology" to > > > mean anything from the integral symbol to the device that brings > > back the (nearly) dead. > > on pain of simply being misunderstood by practically everybody. Wikipedia: > Technology is a broad concept that deals with a species' usage and > knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects a species' ability > to control and adapt to its environment. > > Arguably, the transhumanist problem space can be mapped > > to other niches and environments in ideaspace, and therefore there > > are other representations of transhumanists than simply those who > > verbally reject technology (no matter how much they like their own > > biological technology, *ahem* self-replication?). > > I suppose that anything can be mapped to anything. The play > Hamlet can probably be mapped to fourier analysis in one > way or another. And I would not be completely shocked if > someone who was an expert on Hamlet and also really, really > loved fourier analysis spoke of connections he saw. But > that would be merely a reflection of how his own brain > mapped things. In high school I loved math and chess, > and I swear, I used the very same neurons for both. I > simply could not understand how some people could be > very good in one, and be terrible, try as they might, in > the other. But for me to have said that chess is very > mathematical would have been a mistake. Chess *is* very mathematical. Certainly you are aware of the problem solving mathematics for chess, but I am talking about the basis of chess itself. It is a graph, it is a topology in particular, one where you can describe, what, 10^50 possible state spaces, with various 'moves' or translations from one state to another, making it essentially an operator algebra of one kind or another (ooh, maybe a cellular automata can be used to model it). Not necessarily a Lie group, but that's getting close. What would the binary operations be? That gets complex, there's probably a better entity to use as a prototype to represent the game of chess. This is why you are able to play chess with DNA molecules, or with electrons in your computer. There are some seriously intense mathematicians out there that can show you how those electronic circuits in a processor directly correlate to graph theoretic "topological conversions" (speaking extremely loosely) to the algebras. Now, these same sorts of conversions do not always work (assume the same coherency in processing), so that's why not anything can be mapped to anything, that's why I cannot be mapped immediately to my death. And so what if it's "merely" showing how his brain mapped things? Not all maps are useless (and in this case, there must be a coherency to these wild mappings that the man makes, whether Hamlet, Dark Prince of Denmark, or Oedipus, or Godot). > > I am not saying that he would have otherwise transcended via > > technological replacement of his body or anything like that, I know > > I can't make that argument nor do I want to. But instead I am > > suggesting that there is some commonality in the problem space that > > he worked in, and it is that which makes him somewhat > > transhumanist. > > The commonality you see between Ramanujan's math on the > one hand, and transhumanist concerns and investigations on > the other, really, I contend, just reflect the way *you* think. How could it do otherwise? > There is no real commonality. Except maybe the very, very > common human urges to understand and to create, which > typify intelligent people everywhere (and even some not > so intelligent ones). What is transhumanism but the urge to self-create? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 04:08:53 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 20:08:53 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <01c301c87c1b$263e7dd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Yeah, this is pretty off-topic, and I do apologize to the list. But it was a quiet Saturday afternoon, and I thought it might provide some interest---besides, I was getting damn sick staring at the circuit diagram. :-) Jef writes > You didn't mention the value of the load impedance, It didn't say. The circuit is supposed to have high output impedance, so I thought it wouldn't matter---and I'm pretty sure that that's what the authors are trying to communicate. > but if it were equal to the emitter resistor value, then you would in effect have a > voltage divider putting the emitter at approximately -5V, and (when > the transistor is forward-biased) the base at approximately -4.4. Hopefully I have "drawn" the circuit intelligibly for you. A load impedance (load resistor) that you are describing would be parallel to the 1K resistor I described, right? If so, I don't see any voltage divider. Besides, in this example, the base is at the whim of the investigator, the emitter is therefore .6 volts below that. The resulting voltage draws amps from the 1K resistor (and definitely not from anything else). Did I communicate that properly? > Wow, this takes me back more than a few years. Thanks for your kindly assistance, Lee >> The bottom of the diagram is at -10 volts and the top is at >> +10 volts (i.e. a 20volt supply somewhere). Just above the >> -10 volts is a 1K resistor, and above that the emitter of an >> NPN transistor. There is no resistor between the collector >> and the +10 volts. The experiment is to let the base voltage >> (input) vary between +10 and -10. The output is taken >> (hence "emitter-follower") at the top of the 1K resistor. >> >> Because the base-emitter voltage is always around .6 volts, >> the output naturally follows the input, but at .6 volts less. >> >> But the book says that when the input voltage drops down >> to -4.4 volts, the base-emitter junction gets back-biased, >> (and the transistor turns off?). I don't understand why the >> voltage on the base cannot keep going down, say to -6V, >> with the output voltage continuing to keep in step, say at >> -6.6. Even at -6 volts, there seems to me to be plenty >> of leeway between that and the -10V source below it. >> >> Here is their explanation: >> >> "The output can swing to within a transistor saturation >> voltage drop of VCC (about +9.9v) but it cannot go >> more negative than -5 volts. That is because on the >> extreme negative swing the transistor can do no more >> than turn off, which it does at -4.4 volts input (-5V >> output). Further netgative swing at the input results in >> back-biasing of the base-emitter juntion, but no further >> change in output." >> >> I still don't see why the base could not be at, say, -6v >> and the output .6 lower. Why should the base-emitter >> junction be back-biased when there is still a big voltage >> difference between the base and the -10 volts at bottom? From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Mar 2 04:16:16 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 20:16:16 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question In-Reply-To: <01c301c87c1b$263e7dd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <01c301c87c1b$263e7dd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Yeah, this is pretty off-topic, and I do apologize to the list. > But it was a quiet Saturday afternoon, and I thought it might > provide some interest---besides, I was getting damn sick > staring at the circuit diagram. :-) > > Jef writes > > > You didn't mention the value of the load impedance, > > It didn't say. The circuit is supposed to have high output impedance, > so I thought it wouldn't matter---and I'm pretty sure that that's what > the authors are trying to communicate. The defining characteristic of an emitter-follower circuit is its **low** output impedance, capable of driving higher-current loads. > > but if it were equal to the emitter resistor value, then you would in effect have a > > voltage divider putting the emitter at approximately -5V, and (when > > the transistor is forward-biased) the base at approximately -4.4. > > Hopefully I have "drawn" the circuit intelligibly for you. A load > impedance (load resistor) that you are describing would be > parallel to the 1K resistor I described, right? If so, I don't see > any voltage divider. Yes, the load would be in parallel with the emitter resistor, and ideally of approximately equal value for efficient coupling (energy transfer.) - Jef From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 04:25:00 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 20:25:00 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ramanujan References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200803011816.35532.kanzure@gmail.com> <019601c87c01$4dac2d00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803012155.40909.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <01c701c87c1d$662c8a70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes >> It seems to me that you are using some words very non-standardly. >> Pure math, for example, is never considered technology. You should >> not use "technology" to >> >> > mean anything from the integral symbol to the device that brings >> > back the (nearly) dead. >> >> on pain of simply being misunderstood by practically everybody. > > Wikipedia: >> Technology is a broad concept that deals with a species' usage and >> knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects a species' ability >> to control and adapt to its environment. Well, "tools and crafts" doesn't include math on most people's usage of these terms. Mind, there is no *right* and *wrong* meaning to be ascribed to any given word, except what it conveys in the common parlance. Sure, math is a tool in some ways, but that is not what the wikipedia meant. No one could call Smale, Wiles, and Kolmogorov (rest his soul) "leaders of technology". It's just a vocabulary and concept mismatch. >> and I swear, I used the very same neurons for both. I >> simply could not understand how some people could be >> very good in one, and be terrible, try as they might, in >> the other. But for me to have said that chess is very >> mathematical would have been a mistake. > > Chess *is* very mathematical. Certainly you are aware of the problem > solving mathematics for chess, but I am talking about the basis of > chess itself. It is a graph, it is a topology in particular, one where > you can describe, what, 10^50 possible state spaces, with Well, no one, at least no one until recently, approached it as a math problem. It's a game, or an art. People can be very good at it who are lousy at math. Others can be very good at math but can't play chess for the life of them. They're really separate talents. >> The commonality you see between Ramanujan's math on the >> one hand, and transhumanist concerns and investigations on >> the other, really, I contend, just reflect the way *you* think. > > How could it do otherwise? Take N. F. Fyodorov, for example. His concerns really did relate to cryonics and hence to transhumanism. Other writers of the 19th and early 20th centuries also clearly expressed transhumanist ideals. Ramanujan? No way. If you want to say he did, then you are reduced to claiming that every mathematician is a transhumanist, and other equal absurdities. >> There is no real commonality. Except maybe the very, very >> common human urges to understand and to create, which >> typify intelligent people everywhere... > > What is transhumanism but the urge to self-create? Wikipedia says: Transhumanism (sometimes symbolized by >H or H+),[1] a term often used as a synonym for "human enhancement", is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human mental and physical abilities and aptitudes, and ameliorate what it regards as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition, such as stupidity, suffering, disease, aging and involuntary death. Transhumanist thinkers study the possibilities and consequences of developing and using human enhancement techniques and other emerging technologies for these purposes. But what I referred to, namely the urge "to create", applies especially to musicians, poets, artists, novelists, web-designers, and can characterize the thinking, often, of scientists, mathematicians, engineers, business leaders, and so on. Your term "self-create" seems a tad ambiguous. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 04:35:49 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 20:35:49 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><01c301c87c1b$263e7dd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <01d301c87c1e$e9210ea0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jef writes >> It didn't say. The circuit is supposed to have high output impedance, >> so I thought it wouldn't matter---and I'm pretty sure that that's what >> the authors are trying to communicate. > > The defining characteristic of an emitter-follower circuit is its > **low** output impedance, capable of driving higher-current loads. Oops. Thanks for the correction. Yes, I meant low output impedance. > Yes, the load would be in parallel with the emitter resistor, and > ideally of approximately equal value for efficient coupling (energy > transfer.) Hmm. Well, I still doubt it would matter any what the load is, because, as you say, the point is to provide a low impedance signal to the next stage. Do you think that maybe the transistor needs a certain amount of *current* to keep going? It might happen then that if the base went down to -4.4V, the current it drew (i.e. over the 1K, about 5.6 milliamps) wouldn't be enough. But I can't remember reading anything like that. Thanks, Lee From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 05:00:41 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:00:41 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Mindless Thought Experiments In-Reply-To: <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 02/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > We have hashed that out so many times years and so many years > ago. I suppose I'm proud to have been on the cutting edge > so very long ago. Jason's comments and questions are really > very, very old stuff here. > > As far as I know, the Extropian list, and then later Wei Dai's list and > SL4, were the first forums in which all this was debated at length and > at a very high level. Hilary Putnam discussed this idea in his 1988 book "Representation and Reality". > Now, of course, this is not to mean to say that all these very complex > questions have been totally resolved. They haven't, and they won't be > for a long time. Someday, even if it were thousands of years from now, > barring catastrophe or collapse, uploaded entities who run however > many copies of themselves whenever they want, and who have long > ago left biological substrates, will no doubt consider these questions > resolved. Meanwhile, what we have done is to practice thinking about > what their answers will be. One possible answer could be that it's true and it isn't incompatible with functionalism. Let me define another philosophical position: Addition Functionalism. This is the theory that addition is multiply realisable, on widely varying substrates. Thus, addition can be implemented on your fingers, in your head, on an abacus, and so on. It is also being implemented by accident in any arbitrary physical system with enough complexity, even though no-one is around to recognise it. But this is absurd; so either Addition Functionalism is false, or some rule must be added to stop the accidental implementations. Right? -- Stathis Papaioannou From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 05:23:39 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 21:23:39 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Addition Functionalism (was Mindless Thought Experiments) References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <01dd01c87c25$9a7bd4e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stathis writes > Let me define another philosophical position: Addition Functionalism. > This is the theory that addition is multiply realisable, on widely > varying substrates. Thus, addition can be implemented on your fingers, > in your head, on an abacus, and so on. It is also being implemented by > accident in any arbitrary physical system with enough complexity, even > though no-one is around to recognise it. But this is absurd; so either > Addition Functionalism is false, or some rule must be added to stop > the accidental implementations. Right? Okay, I'll bite :-) I would say "right", and that Addition Functionalism is correct. My proviso: the key factor is how explicit it is. If two planetoids gently collide, their masses are explicitly added, but if Van Maanen's Star and S Doradus each emit a certain but different number of photons in a given second, then the addition is highly implicit (or hidden). At a different, higher level, an intelligent entity (from a crow to an advanced AI) may map these environmental additions, but mostly only explicit ones, into mental sums or feelings of numerical quantity. Lee From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 05:31:05 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:31:05 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem In-Reply-To: <200803011727.01574.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <580930c20803011426x6d60f3d5x9651fa19f95c1cda@mail.gmail.com> <200803011727.01574.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 02/03/2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: > It is my understanding that it is a bit more complicated than that, not > just fluorescent laser spectroscopy, but rather some sort of gel > electrophoresis system where the DNA strands are ran down all at once > and then you correlate massive datasets together to figure out where > all of the DNA molecules were in synch or where they weren't, and stuff > like that. I'd like to be wrong - I hope it's as easy as a laser > reading each individual nucleotide reporter. That's so: the laser and computer automate the reading out and analysis of DNA fragments separated according to length by electrophoresis. I remember 20 years ago doing it all by hand on big glass plates, squinting at autoradiographs to read off a few hundred nucleotides at a time. -- Stathis Papaioannou From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 2 06:37:50 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 22:37:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question (Emitter Follower) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803020704.m2274Xbc010099@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Jef Allbright ... > > If not, there's piclist. > > I saw the question as directly relevant to the typical > disconnect ... But as a question of > basic transistor circuit theory I fail to see its relevance > to this list. > > - Jef Do you guys remember the Muppet Show? Whenever needed, someone would call out for the Royal Smart Person. We are among friends here. It is considered legitimate use the ExI-chat list as one's personal collection of RSPs, so long as the privege is not abused and people don't get too bored. Technical discussions can always be taken offlist. I found Lee's transistor question interesting, altho I struggled in electronics theory class myself and didn't have the answer. Thanks Jef for serving as the local electronics RSP. spike From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 08:32:32 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 19:32:32 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question In-Reply-To: <01d301c87c1e$e9210ea0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <019c01c87c04$44fd1810$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <01c301c87c1b$263e7dd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <01d301c87c1e$e9210ea0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 02/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Do you think that maybe the transistor needs a certain amount > of *current* to keep going? It might happen then that if the > base went down to -4.4V, the current it drew (i.e. over the > 1K, about 5.6 milliamps) wouldn't be enough. But I can't > remember reading anything like that. It does sound like that's what the authors are saying, since on the next page it says "Possible solutions to this problem [i.e. the clipping on the negative voltage swing] involve... decreasing the emitter resistor...", which would have the effect of increasing the emitter current and hence the base current for a given emitter voltage. Note that at this point the *emitter* current would be 5mA, but the base current would be about 5mA/Hfe. -- Stathis Papaioannou From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 08:34:53 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 19:34:53 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Addition Functionalism (was Mindless Thought Experiments) In-Reply-To: <01dd01c87c25$9a7bd4e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <01dd01c87c25$9a7bd4e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 02/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Stathis writes > > > Let me define another philosophical position: Addition Functionalism. > > This is the theory that addition is multiply realisable, on widely > > varying substrates. Thus, addition can be implemented on your fingers, > > in your head, on an abacus, and so on. It is also being implemented by > > accident in any arbitrary physical system with enough complexity, even > > though no-one is around to recognise it. But this is absurd; so either > > Addition Functionalism is false, or some rule must be added to stop > > the accidental implementations. Right? > > Okay, I'll bite :-) I would say "right", and that Addition Functionalism > is correct. My proviso: the key factor is how explicit it is. If two planetoids > gently collide, their masses are explicitly added, but if Van Maanen's Star > and S Doradus each emit a certain but different number of photons in a > given second, then the addition is highly implicit (or hidden). > > At a different, higher level, an intelligent entity (from a crow to an advanced > AI) may map these environmental additions, but mostly only explicit ones, > into mental sums or feelings of numerical quantity. There's not much practical difference between saying addition is not implemented unless someone observes it, or addition is implemented but is of no interest unless someone observes it. But if the physical process in question has associated with it consciousness, you would have to say that the consciousness still happens, unless you claim that it is somehow contingent on being observed by another conscious entity. -- Stathis Papaioannou From estropico at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 09:40:18 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:40:18 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803020140v11ab8884tdd9d9e5505e1e24@mail.gmail.com> Another few clarifications seem to be necessary to clarify Stefano's "accusations". I have never voted for, never mind supported, the Italian politcal party called Alleanza Nazionale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Alliance_(Italy), nor is my site (www.estropico.com) in any way connected with that party. I actually have some serious issues with their former Agriculture minister who was against genetically modified crops, and I'm far from keen on their statalism, but I started dropping my *fundamental* prejudices against them from the moment they became, and it took them decades, a **post** fascist party, despite their historical roots. From the Alleanza Nazionale Wikipedia entry: "When Gianfranco Fini visited Israel in late November 2003 in the function of Italian Deputy Prime Minister, he labeled the racial laws issued by the fascist regime in 1938 as "infamous". He also referred to the RSI as belonging to the most shameful pages of the past, and considered fascism part of an era of "absolute evil". Is that why Stefano seems to hate this party so much? Does he see them as "traitors"? The problem I have with Stefano Vaj and his personal brand of transhumanism is that, despite his continuos denials of never having had anything to do with the far right, his name keeps popping up over and over again on the websites of a certain Italian political side, which is difficult to label and that is been called different things by different people: Nouvelle droite? Far right? "Ethno-identitarian"? "Antagonistic" right? Alternative right? Anti-globalisation fascist? Pagan neo-fascist? Plain neo-fascist? Take your pick. One thing they are not, I suspect, is **post** fascists... Here's a Google translation of a (longish) article where I provide some background on this strange fringe of the neo-fascist microcosm, the emergenge, from it, of a "transhumanist" sub-fringe, its impact on the Italian Transhumanist Association, and why www.estropico.com has found it necessary to publish such an article to distantiate itself from their brand of "transhumanism". http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.estropico.com%2Fid314.htm&langpair=it%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 Cheers, Fabio > From: "Stefano Vaj" > Subject: Re: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: > <580930c20803011303w1f749a5ah1f79e7872217ad9 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:48 PM, estropico wrote: > > > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > > > > > ...be the Nouvelle Droite > > > fascist or not, if I were a "representative" of the same... > > > > You might want to update your book's website, then: "responsabile > > italiano del S?cretariat Etudes et Recherches del Groupement de > > Recherche et Etudes pour la Civilisation Europ?enne (GRECE)": > > http://www.biopolitica.it/biop-autore.html > > Mere sloppiness or deliberate misinformation? > > The truncated quote of my bio thereing reads "gi? responsabile > del...", meaning "former head of...". That S?cretariat in fact has > not even existed for more than twenty-five years now. As for the > quality of the work performed by the same, the number of Nobelists > involved at that time in the publications of GRECE is a good enough > testimony of what it could achieve before its deplorable conservative > turn, which led on the other hand to Mr. de Benoist's regular > invitations as a speaker by the Italian post-fascist environments > supported by your friends and yourself. > > Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 12:23:31 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:23:31 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803020140v11ab8884tdd9d9e5505e1e24@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803020140v11ab8884tdd9d9e5505e1e24@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803020423q59479029k7156aabed9df7a48@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 10:40 AM, estropico wrote: > Another few clarifications seem to be necessary to clarify Stefano's > "accusations". My only "accusations" concern you deliberate lies and half-truths aimed at deliberately sabotaging, usually through me, the AIT's action. > > I have never voted for, never mind supported, the Italian politcal > party called Alleanza Nazionale > He also > referred to the RSI as belonging to the most > shameful pages of the past, and considered fascism part of an era of > "absolute evil". Is that why Stefano seems to hate this party so much? > Does he see them as "traitors"? "Hate"? I happen to have a small but staunch group of personal fans in this party (as I do, btw, amongst Italian federalists and some very peculiar left-wing groups). Their press is wide open to me for whatever I fancy to contribute and the official party daily newspaper has interviewed me and published favourable critics of my books. As a law scholar, to my great surprise, I happen to have been recently indicated by Alleanza Nazionale, together with Mr. Berlusconi's party and the Northern League, to the Lombard governor and parliament, as one of the five "wise men" to whom the drafting of the new Lombardy constitution has been entrusted. Yet, I have never made it a secret that I cannot condone the fact that the current leadership of Alleanza Nazionale has chosen to support positions that are hardly defensible from H+, be they libertarian or progressive, points of view, such as bioluddism, parasitic economic monopolies (such as Mr. Berlusconi's on Italian TV broadcasting), pro-life militantism, teocon extremism (see the delirious campaign for the obligatory exhibition of catholic symbols in Italian schools), the power and salaries of Italian unelected, unsupervised bureaucrats, and above all the "nuke-'em-all" international relationship approach that you seem to like so much, even though Alleanza Nazionale may now pretend to have substituted US- or Israeli super-hawks as the object of their loyalty to Nazi Germany. So, basically, I think it fine and dandy that transhumanism is represented throughout the entire political spectrum, Alleanza Nazionale and Mr. Berlusconi's party and other Italian right-wing groups obviously included. I strongly oppose the idea, however, that by paying some lip service to technology of immediate business or military relevance transhumanism should be manipulated in becoming an additional recruitment operation for dubious, partisan and minority power environments who do not even show any appreciation of your efforts to this end and preach neo-luddite ideas much more than the Italian left does. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 15:13:01 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:13:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <580930c20803020423q59479029k7156aabed9df7a48@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803020140v11ab8884tdd9d9e5505e1e24@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803020423q59479029k7156aabed9df7a48@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803020713u2f0ff3a9n5e842ee922c917cf@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 10:40 AM, estropico wrote: > > > Another few clarifications seem to be necessary to clarify Stefano's > > "accusations". > > My only "accusations" concern you deliberate lies and half-truths aimed at > deliberately sabotaging, usually through me, the AIT's action. I used to find this discussion, originating from personal grudges, very boring when it used to take place on the AIT list. I still find it boring, perhaps even more, on the Extropy list. I am happy to report that the discussion on the AIT list has, since more that one year, moved on to more productive and interesting topics. I hope the same will happen here. I took the initiative to forward to the list a very interesting and well written document written by AIT members, and especially by Riccardo Campa, hoping to stimulate a discussion on the content of the document. Instead, I see the old and tired personal attacks of some Italian transhumanists against some others. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 15:46:13 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 08:46:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200803011724.38240.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803011724.38240.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803020746i1f70e497u8bbedafdd7d9ef3b@mail.gmail.com> Bryan Bishop wrote: Just to make sure, you do understand that I am not dismissive of religions at all, merely in terms of making "transhumanism" a reality, such as making futurist technologies realized, since *not* paying attention to religion does not influence the bottomline technicality of the technologies involved. Otherwise, it's an amazing cultural phenomena and much more. >>> Not paying attention to religion may not influence the bottomline *technicality* of a technology. But in terms of the actual *successful development* of a technology, you need generally a combination of political, corporate, academic and financial support. The "amazing cultural phenomena" you describe, if it turns against you (stem cell research vrs. the Bush Administration, for instance), results in a definite slowing or stopping of potentially life saving medical technology. And even though the research and development would continue in other nations, the U.S. would then be at a serious disadvantage to be a leader in the biotech field and reap the financial harvest. And remember that it's just plain "un-American" to not make tons of money and dominate technological progress! lol you continue: No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility does not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they can protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to burn us alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over the internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It will route around the damage. >>> But warring against research labs and those who fund them in another matter, entirely. It generally takes serious money and disciplined scientific teams to tease out Mother Nature's secrets. you continue: I saw Greg Bear on television a few months ago, he was surprised that there wasn't more high school students doing biotech and related engineering yet, and he's right that it will probably change pretty soon. I should go get the book. Sounds interesting. >>> I think part of the problem may be that highschool chemistry teaching has fallen into such disrepair. "Oh, no, we can't trust the kids to not blow themselves up!" lol In chemistry people learn the joy of scientific investigation. A fairly large percentage of the grad students and postdocs in U.S. research labs are foreign nationals. While I think some "intellectual capital cross-pollination" is a very good thing, I believe the United States may be nearing a "Sputnik crisis" level of potential uneasiness if we do not get *many more* of our young people into science research related advanced degree programs. It may take several decades to fully see the destructive effect of this on the U.S. economy in terms of global competitiveness. And by the time we try to really turn things around we may have lost some critical advantages that might never be fully regained. In terms of national security (and economic strength is a foundation of military strength) and a having a powerful and effective armed forces, the U.S. in my view needs to be much more careful in terms of who does scientific research in our labs and who can gain access to our technological trade secrets. I think we should only let in foreign nationals that are from nations which do not have longterm plans to take our spot as the definitive world superpower. I cringe to think of all the knowledge & power which is leaked out to potentially hostile foreign competitors because we are so dependent on researchers not from our native country. We groom all these brilliant young researchers to only have them go home and make their home nation much more competitive, economically and sometimes militarily. I realize we get short term benefits out of their efforts here but I see it as short term gain for long term loss. Now, regarding a nation truly friendly to us, I say it is our ethical duty to help them and enrich the skills of their research scientists. But we must be careful. An FBI agent once noted that with scientific knowledge so diffused now, foreign intelligence gatherers can find out so much by simply reading various scientific journals and other very public sources of information. They just have to "put the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together" to find what they are searching for in the oceans of information around them. The example was given of a new U.S. naval submarine innovation, which to the horror of the U.S. military, was found to have "all the pieces" for it's reproduction scattered around academia and various journals. Someone just needed to be patient as they hunted for each piece, which could later be used to "assemble the puzzle." We are in a race to develop whatever the next generation of technological innovations are that we must have to stay not just competitive, but ahead of the rest of the world. And yes, we do have our top secret military labs that surely have incredible security and well vetted researchers, but the tech that feeds those places comes generally from corporate and academic America. It will be carefully nurtured and protected technological progress that will maintain our economic strength, and this must be protected every bit as much as some state of the art new weapons system. Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can cause healthy competition among developed nations to make rapid progress in key technologies that would potentially change our lives for the better. I am very grateful for this (would you want a powerful world government that had a negative view of biotech research and passed laws in effect *everywhere* to enforce their stance?, lol) But on the other hand, nationalism can cause extreme over-competitiveness, which leads to wars, both cold and hot. you continue: On that note, who the hell are you supposed to call if you get locked up in Gitmo? Not just any regular lawyer, surely. A super lawyer, perhaps? >>> Why, you get whatever legal defense your military tribunal decides to assign you... ; ) John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 2 16:43:03 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:43:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Bryan Bishop kanzure at gmail.com : On Friday 29 February 2008, estropico wrote: > Italy (like any other country) is unique. Part of its "uniqueness" is > the presence of the Vatican and the power of catholic institutions. >What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they don't >have massive research institutions, they don't have neurofarms, the >only power they have is lots of listeners and a widely distributed >mental program. What does this power have to do with transhumanism? Bryan, see my comment here: http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/storm-over-rome-physicists-against-pope-ratzinger/#comment-91952 and my previous post(s) http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2008-February/040996.html regarding a saga involving the Pope. Here is one example of his role in the Italian government; A very well-qualified (for once) scientist was nominated to head the CNR, and some number of Vatican sympathizers in the Italian Parliament hung up his nomination due to his signing a letter objecting to the Pope making a speech at the inaugural events at Rome La Sapienza University. If you look at the laws passed in the Italian Parliament in the last 5 years, you will find a few significant anti-transhumanism laws passed, due to the influence of the Church. And, you are aware of the Vatican Observatory, aren't you? http://clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/VO.html Their main observatory (the Pope 'scope) is a significant piece of instrumentation on Mount Hopkins in Arizona. The Vatican astronomers are world-class scientists, and I note that one of them is finishing an important position in the largest body of planetary scientists in the world (http://dps.aas.org/) (Consolmagno, see: http://members.aas.org/directory/public_directory_member_details.cfm?ID=13174) Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 17:24:41 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 18:24:41 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803020924g5c54397eoc3b38d5489272784@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 5:43 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > Bryan, see my comment here: > http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/storm-over-rome-physicists-against-pope-ratzinger/#comment-91952 > > and my previous post(s) > http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2008-February/040996.html > > regarding a saga involving the Pope. Here is one example of his role in > the Italian government; A very well-qualified (for once) scientist was > nominated to head the CNR, and some number of Vatican sympathizers in > the Italian Parliament hung up his nomination due to his signing a > letter objecting to the Pope making a speech at the inaugural events at > Rome La Sapienza University. > > If you look at the laws passed in the Italian Parliament in the last > 5 years, you will find a few significant anti-transhumanism > laws passed, due to the influence of the Church. Amara is right. The growing political power in Italy of the Catholic Church, in a period where its religious power has been in steep decline for decades and its ranks are growingly filled by immigrated priests, does not depend from any kind of overwhelming popular support, but on two main factors: - the enormous assets and financial resources it has accumulated during the Cold War when the Christian Democrats were entrusted with the task of keeping the communist party out of the Italian government by the entire West and West-friendly Italian public opinion, also thank to the fact that after twenty year of fascist regime the Church was besides the communist party the only Italian force to have a diffused, territorially widespread coverage; - the fact that in the nowadays bipolar political system, the 4 or 5% of catholic fundamentalists are believed to be on most occasions the swinging vote, determining whether the right or the left is going to govern a given municipality o the entire country; thus, both coalitions tend regularly to put forward candidates with an immaculate catholic or philo-catholic pedigree. Having said that, pro-life is the concern of a militant minority which is a source of embarassment even to the small catholic parties, religion is largely irrelevant to the everyday life of the average Italian unless as a folkloric tradition on the occasion of births, funerals and (less and less) marriages, and creationism, far from being a debated issue, is mostly laughed off from schools and academias. Yet, denouncing the catholic lobby or challenging openly its tenets in public is of growing political sensitiveness, to the point that you would be hard-pressed to find a communist or former communist politician who is willing to admit his own allegiance to dialectic materialism... :-) Stefano Vaj From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 17:27:55 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:27:55 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Addition Functionalism (was Mindless Thought Experiments) References: <200802281006.02410.kanzure@gmail.com> <005201c87a8f$e9ea7d70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <402e01e70802290723id16c225r11d0052ecef7ec91@mail.gmail.com> <005001c87afa$52c1bba0$45ef4d0c@MyComputer> <011001c87bc4$d06c3ce0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <01dd01c87c25$9a7bd4e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <020e01c87c8b$3389daf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stathis writes >> [I would say] that Addition Functionalism >> is correct. My proviso: the key factor is how explicit it is. If two planetoids >> gently collide, their masses are explicitly added, but if Van Maanen's Star >> and S Doradus each emit a certain but different number of photons in a >> given second, then the addition is highly implicit (or hidden). >> >> At a different, higher level, an intelligent entity (from a crow to an advanced >> AI) may map these environmental additions, but mostly only explicit ones, >> into mental sums or feelings of numerical quantity. > > There's not much practical difference between saying addition is not > implemented unless... I'm sure you meant "difference between saying addition is implimented unless..." So I'll proceed on that basis. You wrote > There's not much practical difference between saying addition is > implemented unless someone observes it, or addition is implemented > but is of no interest unless someone observes it. I'll agree with the latter, but my guess is that we can get away with saying that what remote non-intelligent natural processes sometimes do is "add", and to call this process addition. I like to de-emphasize observers and to try to use scientific sentences to apply to phenomena, whether or not they are observed by anything, just as we do in daily life. > But if the physical process in question has associated with it > consciousness, you would have to say that the consciousness > still happens, Yes, consciousness is a physical activity, and surely someday rather good criteria will be firmly established that sort all machines on the continuum from the very conscious end to the unconscious pebbles and trees on the other end. Our mind children will judge that we now are already pretty good at it, I'll wager. > unless you claim that it is somehow contingent on being observed > by another conscious entity. :-) Yep, I have never liked the views that ascribe a role to consciousness, though in some sense it can be argued that your observation determines which universe you'll inhabit, and that may turn out to be isomorphic to some of what the "consciousness counts" crowd says. Lee From benboc at lineone.net Sun Mar 2 17:30:59 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:30:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] "Deities" and "Patents" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CAE453.3070501@lineone.net> "Lee Corbin" wrote: > I'm sure that many, many people noticed "Pattents" is > misspelled. Why didn't even one of them correct it? Could it be something to do with the fact that that's how Americans (mis-)pronounce it? If you're going to pronounce it that way, why not spell it like that? Surely that's simpler and more Websterish, no? ben zaiboc From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 18:07:25 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 10:07:25 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italiantranshumanists Message-ID: <022d01c87c90$b690fff0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Estropico writes about the fascist and neo-fascist ideologies. Could someone supply a score-card to us innocent bystanders as to what is meant? My problem is that in the Anglosphere the word "fascist" is almost entirely meaningless (mainly because no one calls themselves such a thing). George Orwell said as early as 1946(!) that it had become meaningless. But perhaps in Europe, especially in Italy where the term originated of course, things might be different. In the long URL below, Fabio has evidently written > The label "fascist" (or "neo-fascist") is generally rejected, > but not by all [1]. but I cannot read the footnote. Are there really significant numbers of people who call themselves either of these labels? Are any of them, calling themselves "fascist" or "neo-fascist" in the Italian Transhumanist movement? (If there are, they should keep a low profile about these names, since they certainly give a bad impression. Or so I suppose.) On what "fascism" originally meant, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism says, not surprisingly "patriotism, nationalism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, corporatism, populism, collectivism, autocracy and opposition to political and economic liberalism On neo-Fascism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-fascism says Neo-fascism is a post-World War II ideology that includes significant elements of fascism. The term neo-fascist may apply to groups that express a specific admiration for Benito Mussolini and fascist Italy. Neo-fascism usually includes nationalism, anti-immigration policies or, where relevant, nativism (see definition), anti-communism, and opposition to the parliamentary system and liberal democracy. Allegations that a group is neo-fascist may be hotly contested, especially if the term is used as a politic epithet. Some post- World War II regimes have been described as neo-fascist due to their authoritarian nature, and sometimes due to their fascination with fascist ideology and rituals. which seems fair (to me) and makes sense (to me). It does in English, that is :-) Thanks, Lee > http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.estropico.com%2Fid314.htm&langpair=it%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 > Cheers, > Fabio From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 18:10:57 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:10:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2d6187670803021010y126cbfads857bb268b4543f0c@mail.gmail.com> Amara Graps wrote: If you look at the laws passed in the Italian Parliament in the last 5 years, you will find a few significant anti-transhumanism laws passed, due to the influence of the Church. >>> Amara, how much real influence/raw power does the Roman Catholic Church have on a global scale? Can they still strongly sway American Catholics? Non-Italian European Catholics? Asian Catholics? I would think in the developed world as a whole their power to affect politics & science is quite limited. But in the third world (especially Latin America) they probably still hold great sway. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 18:55:22 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 12:55:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200803021255.23132.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Amara Graps wrote: > If you look at the laws passed in the Italian Parliament in the last > 5 years, you will find a few significant anti-transhumanism > laws passed, due to the influence of the Church. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From robert.bradbury at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 18:56:41 2008 From: robert.bradbury at gmail.com (Robert Bradbury) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:56:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: I have not posted to the list in some time. And due to philosophical differences I will not engage in open discussions (which are not really open!). But a problem has been troubling me recently as I have viewed press releases for various AI conferences. I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. More importantly it has what I would call back propagating effects. Why should iI expend ntellectual energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? Put another way, those of you who have had and/or are investing in children are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. If an AGI develops or is developed their existence is fairly pointless. Our current culture obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous for younger minds. They will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world. So given some limited genetic drive to keep making humans, that will last a while. But I see no way out of the perspective that the general development (vs the managed development) of an AGI leads to the survival of humanity. And so, we must present transhumanism as an "Extinction Level Event" -- are willing to deal with thiat? Robert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From xuenay at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 19:03:20 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 21:03:20 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803021103w2da4df0ey2deea6798199ade3@mail.gmail.com> On 3/2/08, Robert Bradbury wrote: > I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. More > importantly it has what I would call back propagating effects. Why should > iI expend ntellectual energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? Put The AGI can come up with ways for us to voluntarily upgrade into a posthuman species. Then we won't become obsolete. -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From clementlawyer at hotmail.com Sun Mar 2 19:39:46 2008 From: clementlawyer at hotmail.com (James Clement) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:39:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert; If you've been following transhumanist email lists such as this one and WTA-Talk, then you'll know that we're not blind to the potential negative consequences of an unfriendly AGI. The WTA in particular supports the concerns and work of the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (see in particular http://www.singinst.org/upload/artificial-intelligence-risk.pdf by Eliezer Yudkowsky) and the Lifeboat Foundation (see the AIShield program at http://lifeboat.com/ex/ai.shield). Both of these organizations are working to create research guidelines, safety protocols, and contingency plans dealing with "friendly AI." As someone who has computer programming knowledge and an obvious concern over these matters, perhaps you would want to join these organizations and participate in their work. Since you've stated that you don't want to engage in open discussions, I'd be happy to assist you in contacting the above-referenced groups offlist, if you so desire. Personally, I follow Ray Kurzweil's philosophy that you have to look at what's going on in the whole of science and technology and not focus on the problems of just one area as though advances will ONLY take place in that field in isolation of all of the other fields. Many researchers are working on improving human-level cognition, human-computer interfaces, and other neuroengineering challenges. I personally think it would be jumping to a conclusion to think that AGI will reach any sort of superhuman intelligence level before we have the ability to plug into such systems and use them directly for our own purposes. That's not to say it can't happen (hence the importance of the work being done by the above-referenced organizations), just that we shouldn't jump to the most extreme, doomsday, conclusions. Best regards, James ClementExecutive Director World Transhumanist Association Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:56:41 -0500From: robert.bradbury at gmail.comTo: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.orgSubject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI?I have not posted to the list in some time. And due to philosophical differences I will not engage in open discussions (which are not really open!).But a problem has been troubling me recently as I have viewed press releases for various AI conferences.I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. More importantly it has what I would call back propagating effects. Why should iI expend ntellectual energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? Put another way, those of you who have had and/or are investing in children are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. If an AGI develops or is developed their existence is fairly pointless. Our current culture obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous for younger minds. They will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world.So given some limited genetic drive to keep making humans, that will last a while. But I see no way out of the perspective that the general development (vs the managed development) of an AGI leads to the survival of humanity.And so, we must present transhumanism as an "Extinction Level Event" -- are willing to deal with thiat?Robert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 20:08:00 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 21:08:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803021208h807625bl3e7cc250d723799@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Robert Bradbury wrote: > I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. > More importantly it has what I would call back propagating effects. Why > should iI expend ntellectual energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? > Put another way, those of you who have had and/or are investing in children > are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. If an AGI develops or is > developed their existence is fairly pointless. Our current culture > obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous for younger minds. They > will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world. > OK. Thus, you think that if somebody who would like to perpetuate himself he or she should start investing from now in the development of an AGI. Fine with me, even though I believe that no harm will derive from a few children on the side... :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 2 20:10:46 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 12:10:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: Message-ID: <023f01c87ca1$8410ede0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Hi Robert! Welcome back. Your posts have been sorely missed, and I neglected to mention this when you posted a month or so ago. > I have not posted to the list in some time. And due to philosophical > differences I will not engage in open discussions (which are not really open!). Sorry to hear about that, but I can understand. But could you mention a bit how that is, just for closure? I've been driven off myself, at least once. (Would need a new thread, if you could be so kind). > But a problem has been troubling me recently as I have viewed press > releases for various AI conferences. I believe the production of an > AGI spells the extinction of humanity...Why should I expend intellectual > energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? I figure that humanities chances are about fifty-fifty. Or, rather, it's absolutely too hard to have a good idea of what will happen (as Taleb explains so well in "The Black Swan", though rather wordily). So: Half the time, I'm dead. We're all dead. Case closed. How sad. But half the time somehow the reigning intelligence(s) manage to respect private property and respect tradition[1]---in which case H O T D A M N ! ! Things will be so literally unimaginably good for me/us that we literally cannot conceive of it. Now... do the weighted sum.... :-) > If an AGI develops or is developed their existence is fairly pointless. Not for me. "To delight in understanding" is my credo, what life is all about for me. Besides, there'll be nice drugs that will help moods (www.hedweb.com!), as we know, without interfering in other things. And that's before uploading! > Our current culture obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous > for younger minds. They will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world. Obsolete for what? I'm already obsolete in music composing and nanotube transistor design. Lee [1] I have often called this "the logic of cryonics": We save those who came before, in order that those who come after will save us. An AI may reason similarly: it can very well become obsolete too, so it has logical reason to subscribe to this doctrine. At completely negligible expense it can preserve its ancestors (including us), so why not? Then it may expect its replacements to follow the same logic, and so on. From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 20:16:35 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 21:16:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803021216l4ea4fea9y28e0e575acfe67b9@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:39 PM, James Clement wrote: > That's not to say it can't happen (hence the importance of the work being > done by the above-referenced organizations), just that we shouldn't jump to > the most extreme, doomsday, conclusions. > Lest I repeat myself for the umpteenth time on this issue, I would limit myself to reiterate that defining a future substitution of "children of the mind" to "biological children" as an unqualified "doomsday conclusion" should at least be argumented a little more. Unless of course we consider the coming of homo sapiens as "doom" or "extinction" for our pre-sapiens ancestors. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 2 20:38:56 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:38:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Tom Nowell nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk : >Italy, like most developed countries, is a >representative democracy. That's not strictly true, in Italy's case. http://www.beppegrillo.it/eng/2008/03/illegal_political_elections.html Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 2 20:56:52 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 14:56:52 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <580930c20803021216l4ea4fea9y28e0e575acfe67b9@mail.gmail.co m> References: <580930c20803021216l4ea4fea9y28e0e575acfe67b9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302145542.022ea6b8@satx.rr.com> At 09:16 PM 3/2/2008 +0100: >Unless of course we consider the coming of homo sapiens as "doom" or >"extinction" for our pre-sapiens ancestors. > >Stefano Vaj Of course we do (it was), but we don't care, unless we're exceptionally sentimental. Damien Broderick From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 21:08:03 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 15:08:03 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200803021508.03805.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Robert Bradbury wrote: > I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. There was a post on one of these mailing lists years ago that argued that we are already ai. Thus intelligence is a factor of our humanity. Therefore, you're arguing that the production of more intelligence means the extinction of intelligence (and lots of other things that make up 'humanity'). Which is false, since producing intelligence != immediately destroying intelligence. If you wish to remove intelligence from our humanity, aren't you that very AGI that you originally set out to destroy? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 21:09:27 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:09:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302145542.022ea6b8@satx.rr.com> References: <580930c20803021216l4ea4fea9y28e0e575acfe67b9@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080302145542.022ea6b8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803021309n2553e0b8y2d1e81ad706f16b4@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:16 PM 3/2/2008 +0100: > >Unless of course we consider the coming of homo sapiens as "doom" or > >"extinction" for our pre-sapiens ancestors. > > Of course we do (it was), but we don't care, unless we're > exceptionally sentimental. > Yes, this is a possible way to put things. In the event of biological descent one could even argue that each subsequent generation represents the extinction of the previous one, or that mitosis represents the "death" of the parent, and subsequently splitted, cell. A more optimistic spin on the same phenomenon, however, is that the "life" of a given species or unicellular organism "goes on" in its progeny. I suspect that the difference between the two languages is much more of a rhetoric rather than substantial nature. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joao at genetics.med.harvard.edu Sun Mar 2 20:35:46 2008 From: joao at genetics.med.harvard.edu (Joao Magalhaes) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:35:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20080302153546.0d0859d0@receptor.med.harvard.edu> The new generation sequencing technologies don't require electrophoresis: http://www.illumina.com/pages.ilmn?ID=203 They do require a scaffold reference genome for alignment of all the reads. Cheers, Joao Pedro At 18:27 01-03-2008, you wrote: >On Saturday 01 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > A modern sequencer itself is a fairly powerful computer. The new > > machines being brought online at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute > > are robots from waist-height upwards, where the machinery grows and > > then treats microscopic specks of DNA in serried ranks so that a > > laser can illuminate it and a moving camera capture the fluorescing > > bases every two seconds. The lower half of each cabinet holds the > > computers needed to coordinate the machinery and do the preliminary > > processing of the camera pictures. At the heart of the machine is a > > plate of treated glass about the size of an ordinary microscope > > slide, which contains around 30m copies of 2,640 tiny fragments of > > DNA, all arranged in eight lines along the glass, and all with the > > bases at their tips being directly read off by a laser. > >It is my understanding that it is a bit more complicated than that, not >just fluorescent laser spectroscopy, but rather some sort of gel >electrophoresis system where the DNA strands are ran down all at once >and then you correlate massive datasets together to figure out where >all of the DNA molecules were in synch or where they weren't, and stuff >like that. I'd like to be wrong - I hope it's as easy as a laser >reading each individual nucleotide reporter. > >- Bryan >________________________________________ >Bryan Bishop >http://heybryan.org/ >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --- Joao Pedro de Magalhaes, PhD Harvard Medical School, Dept. of Genetics 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur, NRB 238 (Church lab) Boston, MA 02115 Telephone: 1-617-432-6512 http://www.senescence.info From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 21:40:07 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:40:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <023f01c87ca1$8410ede0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <023f01c87ca1$8410ede0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <2d6187670803021340n2a28325asa49078a11a22f168@mail.gmail.com> Robert Bradbury (>) and Lee Corbin wrote: > But a problem has been troubling me recently as I have viewed press > releases for various AI conferences. I believe the production of an > AGI spells the extinction of humanity...Why should I expend intellectual > energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? I figure that humanities chances are about fifty-fifty. Or, rather, it's absolutely too hard to have a good idea of what will happen (as Taleb explains so well in "The Black Swan", though rather wordily). So: Half the time, I'm dead. We're all dead. Case closed. How sad. But half the time somehow the reigning intelligence(s) manage to respect private property and respect tradition[1]---in which case H O T D A M N ! ! Things will be so literally unimaginably good for me/us that we literally cannot conceive of it. Now... do the weighted sum.... :-) > If an AGI develops or is developed their existence is fairly pointless. Not for me. "To delight in understanding" is my credo, what life is all about for me. Besides, there'll be nice drugs that will help moods (www.hedweb.com!), as we know, without interfering in other things. And that's before uploading! > Our current culture obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous > for younger minds. They will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world. Obsolete for what? I'm already obsolete in music composing and nanotube transistor design. Lee [1] I have often called this "the logic of cryonics": We save those who came before, in order that those who come after will save us. An AI may reason similarly: it can very well become obsolete too, so it has logical reason to subscribe to this doctrine. At completely negligible expense it can preserve its ancestors (including us), so why not? Then it may expect its replacements to follow the same logic, and so on. (end of excerpt, but hopefully not humanity) Wow! This exchange between Robert and Lee reminded me of the "good old days" of the Extropy list (back before even the dawn of the 21st century). : ) I have very fond memories of Robert Bradbury due to his online postings and having met him in person. He helped me attend Extro 5, where I had some great experiences. I wish Robert would come back to the group and that he could feel free to speak his mind. I am disturbed that he now views the prospects for humanity as being very slim to none. Robert Bradbury is a very bright and educated man so I take into serious consideration what he says. But I do wonder if matters in his personal life have somehow clouded his perspective (this is only conjecture and I mean no offense to you, Robert). I say this because sometimes when I let life get me down, I temporarily develop a very negative worldview. Lee's thoughtful words put a smile on my face and helped boost my spirits because of his very life-affirming and enthusiastic logic. I realize Robert has a point but we must not give in to dispair. Lee Corbin wrote regarding if things should actually work out for humanity: Things will be so literally unimaginably good for me/us that we literally cannot conceive of it. Now... do the weighted sum.... :-) >>> I have to say..., "I don't know, Lee, I can literally conceive of ALOT of good things!" LOL : ) But I understand what you mean. And while I don't envision an utterly problem free utopia, I do think we will look back to this present time as darkly medieval by comparison. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 2 22:18:21 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:18:21 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.2.20080302153546.0d0859d0@receptor.med.harvard.edu> References: <6.1.1.1.2.20080302153546.0d0859d0@receptor.med.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <200803021618.21365.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Joao Magalhaes wrote: > The new generation sequencing technologies don't require > electrophoresis: http://www.illumina.com/pages.ilmn?ID=203 This page is hard to understand. It looks like they're saying they have chemical protocols for the manipulation and PCR amplification of DNA fragments, and are somehow using fluorescent techniques to identify each base pair, but this doesn't tell me what's actually going on. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From joao at genetics.med.harvard.edu Sun Mar 2 22:38:30 2008 From: joao at genetics.med.harvard.edu (Joao Magalhaes) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:38:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Basically, DNA is a computing problem In-Reply-To: <200803021618.21365.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <6.1.1.1.2.20080302153546.0d0859d0@receptor.med.harvard.edu> <200803021618.21365.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20080302173420.0d087d70@receptor.med.harvard.edu> Here is a more detailed description of the Solexa technology used to re-sequence the human genome: http://web.mit.edu/6.874/www/lectures/lecture1/SS_DNAsequencing.pdf And an overview written by my boss of different new generation sequencing technologies: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Church05s.pdf Cheers, JP At 05:18 PM 2/3/2008, you wrote: >On Sunday 02 March 2008, Joao Magalhaes wrote: > > The new generation sequencing technologies don't require > > electrophoresis: http://www.illumina.com/pages.ilmn?ID=203 > >This page is hard to understand. It looks like they're saying they have >chemical protocols for the manipulation and PCR amplification of DNA >fragments, and are somehow using fluorescent techniques to identify >each base pair, but this doesn't tell me what's actually going on. > >- Bryan >________________________________________ >Bryan Bishop >http://heybryan.org/ >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Sun Mar 2 23:50:19 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:50:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <325354.68760.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Bryan's latest comment was "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" in response to Italy's political situation. I have two problems with this attitude: 1) Expecting people to "get out of the kitchen" in the 21st century. This isn't the 19th or early 20th centuries with America asking to "give me your masses, your huddled poor" and many Italians moving to South America to the burgeoning industries there. The most technologically advanced nations are the USA, or "Fortress America" as politicians try to make it in election year, and Japan, a nation with very harsh immigration laws. OK, they do have the right to move anywhere else in the EU, as long as they can overcome the language & cultural barriers. It's still not an easy job. Let's just hope the EU doesn't introduce any anti-transhuman laws like they did laws banning GMO crops, otherwise there's nearly a billion of us with nowhere to run to. 2) "The kitchen" in this case is a significant nation. Looking at wikipedia's list of countries by nominal GDP, the IMF, world bank and CIA factbook all place Italy at no.7. The world's seventh-largest economy introducing anti-transhumanist laws is potentially a moderately sized brake on global development. To take Bryan's analogy, if you can't stand being in the kitchen, what are you going to for food? Try and build a barbecue in the backyard and hope it doesn't rain? In the UK, I'm already familiar with the situation that an Irish woman who wants an abortion has to travel to the British mainland to get it done. When successful technologies based on embryonic stem cells arise, what's the betting that people needing medical treatment may be forced to do the same? We do need to pay attention to what is happening in politics regarding the issues we care about. Tom ___________________________________________________________ Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 00:49:37 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 18:49:37 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <325354.68760.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <325354.68760.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803021849.38376.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Tom Nowell wrote: > Bryan's latest comment was "If you can't stand the > heat, get out of the kitchen" in response to Italy's > political situation. I have two problems with this > attitude: This is the same attitude as taking your hand out of a hot flame. > 1) Expecting people to "get out of the kitchen" in the > 21st century. This isn't the 19th or early 20th So are you saying we have grown stupider? > centuries with America asking to "give me your masses, > your huddled poor" and many Italians moving to South > America to the burgeoning industries there. The most You must take your own hand from the fire, nations can't do it for you. > technologically advanced nations are the USA, or > "Fortress America" as politicians try to make it in > election year, and Japan, a nation with very harsh Nations don't do tech, people do tech. Do it yourself (and with others). > immigration laws. OK, they do have the right to move > anywhere else in the EU, as long as they can overcome > the language & cultural barriers. It's still not an > easy job. Yeah, nobody said things have to be easy. Luckily the body has an immediate reaction to fires and danger, so it's sort of automated. > Let's just hope the EU doesn't introduce any > anti-transhuman laws like they did laws banning GMO > crops, otherwise there's nearly a billion of us with > nowhere to run to. Just because they make something illegal does not mean that it alters the fundamental technicality of being able to do GMO or whatever. And the last time I checked, nearly 100% of the universe was still open. > 2) "The kitchen" in this case is a significant nation. No. "The kitchen" was a metaphor of risk. > Looking at wikipedia's list of countries by nominal > GDP, the IMF, world bank and CIA factbook all place > Italy at no.7. The world's seventh-largest economy > introducing anti-transhumanist laws is potentially a > moderately sized brake on global development. To take You think laws can stop the singularity? > Bryan's analogy, if you can't stand being in the > kitchen, what are you going to for food? Try and build > a barbecue in the backyard and hope it doesn't rain? http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Meat-on-a-stick > In the UK, I'm already familiar with the situation > that an Irish woman who wants an abortion has to > travel to the British mainland to get it done. When That's just money. With enough money, a rich woman could have snuck in an surgical abortionist and performed the operation in Ireland, since that seems to be so important to her. Also, what's wrong with travel? > successful technologies based on embryonic stem cells > arise, what's the betting that people needing medical > treatment may be forced to do the same? We do need to The woman was not forced. She chose an interpretation of the law and stuck with it. The govt (at this point) would be unable to scan the brains of every person within their borders to see if anybody knows how to perform an abortion and assemble the tools and drugs etc. And even if they could, what about one-time pads for sneaking in the relevant information and experience in forms of brain-interface chips? (Since I used mind-reading, I might as well include experience downloading.) > pay attention to what is happening in politics > regarding the issues we care about. Pay attention to the science and the tech. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From ABlainey at aol.com Mon Mar 3 01:11:48 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 20:11:48 EST Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: In a message dated 02/03/2008 18:57:00 GMT Standard Time, robert.bradbury at gmail.com writes: >I have not posted to the list in some time. And due to philosophical differences I will >not engage in open discussions (which are not really open!). > >But a problem has been troubling me recently as I have viewed press releases for >various AI conferences. >I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. More > importantly it has what I would call back propagating effects. Why should iI expend >ntellectual energy, time, money, etc. in a doomed species? Put another way, those >of you who have had and/or are investing in children are potentially pursuing a >pointless endeavor. If an AGI develops or is developed their existence is fairly >pointless. Our current culture obviously shows absorption is nearly instantaneous >for younger minds. They will know they are "obsolete" in an AGI world. >So given some limited genetic drive to keep making humans, that will last a while. >But I see no way out of the perspective that the general development (vs the >managed >development) of an AGI leads to the survival of humanity. > >And so, we must present transhumanism as an "Extinction Level Event" -- are >willing to deal with thiat? > >Robert Hello again Robert (been a long time). I have similar concerns as yourself and I am heavily leaning toward AGI=very bad. In a fairly recent poll of opinions regarding AGI's for Bruce Klien of Novamente. I voiced some of my concerns. The main backbone which these fears are framed around, is the lack of hormonal or chemical influence on an AGI. A subject which I raised many years ago. Personally I have continued to invest in children mainly in the hope that my unified general theory of relativity finally falls together and can be easily applied to get my off this rock, just before the singularity occurs. If all goes well I may return. If not, then at least my home made interstellar cryo chamber won't need topping up every few weeks. There is always hope....... hopefully. Alex Copy of my reply to Bruce pasted below. >Alex, quick question... when do you think AI will surpass human-level intelligence? [ ] 2010-20 [ ] 2020-30 [ ] 2030-50 [ ] 2050-70 [ ] 2070-2100 [ ] Beyond 2100 [ ] Prefer not to make predictions [ ] Other: __ > Hi Bruce, Im not sure I would agree with the question itself, but If you want my honest answer, then it really isn?t as simple as a tickin the box time frame. The truth is that AI already surpasses human intelligence in many areas. As for the fields of intelligence where AI does not equal or surpass human ability, this is really an issue of ?lack of application? rather than lack of applicable technology. I am sure that if the people you have asked this question to are the usual suspects, then you will receive many in-depth calculations of comparative computation, so I will skip the maths to prove the point. So what it boils down to is this: When will we finally put all the relevant technology together in one box, to create an AI that surpasses the average human intelligence? My answer to this would be 2020-30. Unless there is a major world economic upset in the next decade, which is a distinct possibility. In which case I would push it to 2030-50. However I would add a strong caveat and warning. If we do not put all the technology together in one box in a systematic and controlled manner, at some point it will happen spontaneously, through pure chance or accident. The internet being a prime example of opportunity for this to occur. When it happens, and it will. We will have no control, insight or warning. We (Homosapiens) will instantly become obsolete. The ramifications of this are impossible to predict. As if this isn?t bad enough, A spontaneously formed AI will have far superior information gathering skills, strategic analysis, will know our entire knowledge base (Including all the utter rubbish on Wikipedia) and will be completely devoid of ?natural hormonal control? which in short means no emotions, fears, wants, needs or empathy for anyone or thing, including itself. An Intelligence of this magnitude with a global reach into just about every control system on the planet could and probably will do major damage. Although probably not through design or desire, but just through exploration of ability or pure accident. When would I put a time frame on this happening? 2020-30 So as you can see, I think the singularity is going to happen quite soon, whether we want it to or not. It sounds like I am a Doomsayer, but far from it. When you are going to be hit in the head,you generally see it coming and have the chance to duck. The race to the singularity is already well underway and so the real question is: Will we be in control? Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 01:42:57 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 19:42:57 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302194149.022b5058@satx.rr.com> At 08:11 PM 3/2/2008 -0500, Alex expressed: >the hope that my unified general theory of relativity finally falls >together and can be easily applied to get my off this rock How's that coming along? From ABlainey at aol.com Mon Mar 3 01:56:55 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 20:56:55 EST Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" Message-ID: In a message dated 03/03/2008 01:43:37 GMT Standard Time, thespike at satx.rr.com writes: > >the hope that my unified general theory of relativity finally falls > >together and can be easily applied to get my off this rock > > How's that coming along? > > It's coming along nicely. If I could just figure out how to spell light with a 'C', then it should all fall into place. :o) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 02:05:51 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 20:05:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302194149.022b5058@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302194149.022b5058@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803022005.51154.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:11 PM 3/2/2008 -0500, Alex expressed: > > the hope that my unified general theory of relativity finally falls > > together and can be easily applied to get my off this rock > > How's that coming along? Relatively well? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From ABlainey at aol.com Mon Mar 3 02:15:20 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 21:15:20 EST Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" Message-ID: In a message dated 03/03/2008 02:03:04 GMT Standard Time, kanzure at gmail.com writes: > > How's that coming along? > > Relatively well? > > - Bryan LOL, someone had to. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 02:29:22 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:29:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080302202806.0234ae60@satx.rr.com> At 08:56 PM 3/2/2008 -0500, Alex B wrote: >If I could just figure out how to spell light with a 'C', then it >should all fall into place. That would be c. From mail at harveynewstrom.com Mon Mar 3 03:43:58 2008 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:43:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] JOKE: You know it's coming... Message-ID: <812ABD0E09134A90A3D329CFA97F9F19@Catbert> -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI GSEC IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From mail at harveynewstrom.com Mon Mar 3 03:51:52 2008 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:51:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "my unified general theory of relativity" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8D4BA7EC81C84C0A9DEC4BAAE08278EB@Catbert> Al Blainney wrote: > It's coming along nicely. If I could just figure out how to spell > light with a 'C', then it should all fall into place. "candela" (IPA: /k?n?dil?/, symbol: cd) is the SI base unit of luminous intensity (that is, power emitted by a light source in a particular direction, weighted by the luminosity function, a standardized model of the sensitivity of the human eye to different wavelengths). . -- Harvey Newstrom CISSP CISA CISM CIFI GSEC IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 04:09:37 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:09:37 -0600 Subject: [ExI] JOKE: You know it's coming... In-Reply-To: <812ABD0E09134A90A3D329CFA97F9F19@Catbert> References: <812ABD0E09134A90A3D329CFA97F9F19@Catbert> Message-ID: <200803022209.38150.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > I carry a "citation needed" sign with me to class each day in the spirit of xkcd and Wikipedia. Teachers hate it. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From robert.bradbury at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 04:06:49 2008 From: robert.bradbury at gmail.com (Robert Bradbury) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:06:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <6a13bb8f0803021103w2da4df0ey2deea6798199ade3@mail.gmail.com> References: <6a13bb8f0803021103w2da4df0ey2deea6798199ade3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Kaj Sotala wrote: > > The AGI can come up with ways for us to voluntarily upgrade into a > posthuman species. Then we won't become obsolete. > > Kaj, please allow me to assume you have a young mind. And you can assume a transition to a posthuman state. Which may be fine for you -- I don't know. The problem is what happens to those of us who choose not to upgrade? What happens to those 6 billion or more humans (a good 5 billion or more of completely unaware of the forthcoming transition). I.e. those who have not read Nanosystems or Nanomedicine VI or "The consequences of the development" of an AGI, which has not been written yet? I want to allow your future while I cherish your past. Please tell me how to do that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 04:33:43 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:33:43 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: <6a13bb8f0803021103w2da4df0ey2deea6798199ade3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803022233.44032.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, Robert Bradbury wrote: > The problem is what happens to those of us who choose not to upgrade? That's like asking what happens to those who don't change. They die. > What happens to those humans unaware of the forthcoming transition? Due to identity problems, I have no idea. But we can try to store their DNA, their minds, their stories, their data, never of course completely capturing their state, but it's better than waiting for them to die. > I want to allow your future while I cherish my past. (edited) The more you cherish the past, the more restrictive, the more structural, the more crystallized, less entropic, less living, totally dead. You said you are worried about the death of those five billion -- cherishing them too much will bring about their death. > Please tell me how to do that. Maybe if we have a sufficient gradient to attract enough people away from this planet and on to another ... but then you'll lose a significant portion of your past since so many people will just get up and leave (if the gradient is powerful enough). So this is more destructive than you might be looking for. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 07:54:00 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:54:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803022354t777dd4b2t747e1946502b0fe7@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:11 AM, wrote: > If we do not put all the technology together in one box in a systematic and > controlled manner, at some point it will happen spontaneously, through pure > chance or accident. The internet being a prime example of opportunity for > this to occur. When it happens, and it will. We will have no control, > insight or warning. We (Homosapiens) will instantly become obsolete. The > ramifications of this are impossible to predict. I do not think that AGI is going to be a dramatic quantum leap, a sudden awakening of given computer, any more than the moment could be identified when Homo sapiens or a horse was suddenly born from something radically different. What is going to happen is that from machines that can pass the Turing test over 10 questions 1% of the times with 1% of the users (we are probably already there) we will get to machines that can do that over 100 questions 50% of the times with 50% of the users to those who score better than real humans on any finite number of interactions with any finite number of users. As for the obsolescence of Homo sapiens, well, biology is not static itself, what's the big deal? Even though the definition of "extinction" may vary, my own favourite is "dying away without leaving behind any successor". And this, by definition, would definitely not the case should fully artificial, uploaded or mixed digital intelligences become the dominant form of sentience on the planet. Stefano Vaj From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 3 08:27:04 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 01:27:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Stefano Vaj: >Having said that, pro-life is the concern of a militant minority which >is a source of embarassment even to the small catholic parties, >religion is largely irrelevant to the everyday life of the average >Italian I don't think that the Italian women can say that such laws are irrelevant, however. "Demonstrations on Abortion in Italy" (about the abortion Law 194, that is now on the agenda for April's election) http://www.ippfen.org/en/News/Intl+news/Demonstrations+on+abortion+in+Italy.htm "Reproductive medicine, politics and religion in Italy: Reflections on the 2005" (about Law 40, that is doing a good job driving Italian women and couples out of Italy for their reproductive help) http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/ogmius/archives/issue_15/reproductive_medicine.html Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 09:13:59 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:13:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <325354.68760.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <325354.68760.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803030113m2a18f02ck232c3631fcd9fb77@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:50 AM, Tom Nowell wrote: > Bryan's latest comment was "If you can't stand the > heat, get out of the kitchen" in response to Italy's > political situation. I have two problems with this > attitude: > > 1) Expecting people to "get out of the kitchen" in the > 21st century. This isn't the 19th or early 20th > centuries with America asking to "give me your masses, > your huddled poor" and many Italians moving to South > America to the burgeoning industries there. > > 2) "The kitchen" in this case is a significant nation. > Looking at wikipedia's list of countries by nominal > GDP, the IMF, world bank and CIA factbook all place > Italy at no.7. The world's seventh-largest economy > introducing anti-transhumanist laws is potentially a > moderately sized brake on global development. I appreciate that Italy may not be an entirely pleasant or convenient immigration target (ask Amara about that!), depending on the circumstances. On the other hand, while communities may well become with time less territorial in nature, and less invariably identified with Nation-States (which after all have been the dominant political form for just a few centuries...), I think that one has better fight the good fight where he is and where he belongs, be it in Italy or China, Iran or Switzerland, before considering emigration. Especially as long as prior to a posthuman change and to technological leaps we do not exactly have at hand "empty" and unchartered territories where transhumanists may emigrate, Pilgrim Fathers' style, to build their own New Zion. In fact, the remains of political independence that allow countries to pass anti-transhumanist laws are also comforting in the sense that they make for the possibility of passing pro-transhumanist ones, escaping global bans, and maintain a degree of diversity and of international competition that is our best chance in the medium term against prohibitionism and neoluddism. Stefano Vaj From estropico at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 09:35:10 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:35:10 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Lee Corbin" > > In the long URL below, Fabio has evidently written > > The label "fascist" (or "neo-fascist") is generally rejected, but not by all [1]. > but I cannot read the footnote. Here's a better translation of the footnote than Google's (I hope!): Adriano Scianca http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=adriano-scianca&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGIC_enGB230GB230 is an AIT member and an outspoken overhumanist* that doesn't seem to have a problem in publicly declaring that "being a fascist is more fun than being a boring liberaldemocratic" and adds, in answer to the question "Why are you a fascist?", that "in European fascism I find a cultural exuberance, an enthusiasm for experimentation, a philosophical vivacity, a debate on the really central themes of our times that I cannot see in the opposite political side, where all I see is the recycling of puerile phylosofies two thousand years old?" http://www.mirorenzaglia.com/index.php?itemid=70 * I've settled on the neologism "overhumanism" to describe this peculiar version of transhumanism. "Superhumanism" would be a more correct translation, but it's too close to transhumanism (Wikipedia redirects from one to the other) and I feel there's a need of stressing the difference... > Are there really significant numbers > of people who call themselves either of these labels? Are any of > them, calling themselves "fascist" or "neo-fascist" in the Italian > Transhumanist movement? (If there are, they should keep a low > profile about these names, since they certainly give a bad impression. > Or so I suppose.) First of all, as clarified in the note above, "fascist" is a label that is generally publically rejected (the example above being an exception). In the article I also add that "...however tempting it is to simply brand Vaj and the overhumanists as fascists or neofascists, that is not the whole story, even if that is undoubtably their cultural and political background. A more apt description would be that of followers of the French "Nouvelle Droite" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nouvelle_Droite That's the reason why I added a question mark to the title of this thread, btw. To understand the narrative of this *offshoot* of neofascism requires an understanding of what the French Nuovelle Droite is (or was, given that it has sank back into obscurity after some initial success in the late '70s/early '80s). I strongly recommend the Wikipedia link and also a look at two texts I quote in my article: Richard Wolin, "The Seduction of Unreason: The Intellectual Romance with Fascism from Nietzsche to Postmodernism" Stanley G. Payne, "A History of Fascism 1914-1945" Both are in English, obviously, and also available and searcheable on Google Books (searchstring: "nouvelle droite"). According to Wolin: "Their agenda [the Nouvelle Droite's intellectuals] has been relatively straightforward: in a postwar era during which the extreme right had been delegitimated owning to the misdeed of fascism and the taint of collaboration, they have sought to bring right-wing ideas into the political mainstream once again. While, qua intellectuals, many Nouvelle Droite leader have remained politically marginal, in retrospect one would have to avow that they largely succeeded in their primary aims: to reestablish a discourse of xenophobia and racial hatred that has had a deleterious influence on French political culture of the 1980s and 1990s." Payne illustrates, without meaning to, how some Nouvelle Droite sympatisers might be attracted to transhumanism: "the Nouvelle Droite is "extremely elitist, hierarchical and antiegalitarian but rejects the mysticism and idealism of an Evola, affirming the importance of science in modern life and relying heavily on the new sociobiology. Unlike the classic right, the new right maintains a religious position that is exclusively pagan, opposing equally Marxism and 'Judaeo-Christianity'. It attempts to create a political and philosophical program on the basis of a certain kind of human anthropology, which give it an intellectuality and a rigor normally lacking in vitalist neofascism." Last but definitively not least, a quote, taken from my article, from Giorgio Locchi, "source of inspiration for the overhumanists and author of "Political Expression and Repression of the Overhumanist Principle", in which he explains that "one cannot understand fascism without realising, or refusing to admit, that the so-called 'fascist phenomenon' is nothing but the first political manifestation of a larger spiritual and cultural phenomenon, which we can call 'overhumanism'". Further on, we find that "the 'overhumanist principle', in relation to the world surrounding it, becomes the absolute rejection of an opposite 'egalitarian principle' which conforms that world. If the fascist movements recognised the 'enemy', spiritual even before than political, in the democratic ideologies ? liberalism, parlamentarianism, socialism, communism, anarcho-communism ? it is because within the historic prospective instituted by the overhumanist principle those ideologies represent as many manifestations [?] of the opposite egalitarian principle, all aiming toward the same goal, with different level of understanding, and all causes of the spiritual and material decadence of Europe, of the progressive weakening of European man, of the disintegration of Western societies." The introduction to the text is by Stefano Vaj and in it we find that Vaj is in agreement with Locchi on the relationship between fascism and overhumanism. And yes, there are at least two AIT members that belong to this current, the one that's not ashamed of publicly describing himself as a fascist, and Stefano Vaj (who's also the association's unelected "national secretary"). There are also a few others whose membership status I'm not sure about (out of a full membership of 15, myself -for now- included). My main bone of contention with the Italian Transhumanist Association (AIT) is that Campa (the association's founder and president) has made Vaj national secretary (without an election, as there are going to be no internal elections before 2012, by statute). In my opinion this is a PR disaster waiting to happen and risks creating confusion between transhumanism and "overhumanism", both in Italy and internationally. And that's exactly why I am desperately trying to distance my website (www.estropico.com) from the overhumanists. It is difficult to do so without appearing to attack AIT, and for that I'm sorry as we had constructively collaborated until the overhumanists' arrival, but I do make a clear effort, here and in my article, to explain what my target is. A final comment: these "overhumanists" are no jackbooted thugs (which is what most of us think when we hear the term "fascist"). We are talking about prolific writers whose articles frequently appear on a number of (in my opinion, unsavoury) websites and sometimes on national newspapers (party organs, usually), and Vaj is a published author and a fine intellectual. The problem I have is not with who they are but with what they write... BTW, I'm working on a proper (as opposed to Google's) English translation of my article, which I hope will be ready at some point in March. Cheers, Fabio From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 12:24:20 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 06:24:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <580930c20803022354t777dd4b2t747e1946502b0fe7@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20803022354t777dd4b2t747e1946502b0fe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803030624.20534.kanzure@gmail.com> On Monday 03 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > What is going to happen is that from machines that can pass the > Turing test over 10 questions 1% of the times with 1% of the users > (we are probably already there) we will get to machines that can do > that over 100 questions 50% of the times with 50% of the users to > those who score better than real humans on any finite number of > interactions with any finite number of users. > > As for the obsolescence of Homo sapiens, well, biology is not static While reading this, I began to think: why not automate the Turing tests? Let's set up a cloning operation so that we can characterize both the human and ai. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From hkhenson at rogers.com Mon Mar 3 13:17:36 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 06:17:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <580930c20803022354t777dd4b2t747e1946502b0fe7@mail.gmail.co m> References: <580930c20803022354t777dd4b2t747e1946502b0fe7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1204550323_80448@S4.cableone.net> Re this topic, consider spam or computer viruses. Nobody I know supports either. They are, like it or not, a part of our world. Same with AGI. We could be lucky if people of good will incorporate what we learn about what make people "good" into machines. Still, I think zero is the most likely number of physical state humans in the year 2100. Keith From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 15:08:47 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:08:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803030708m28434913y50b48569960dba@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Amara Graps wrote: > Stefano Vaj: > >Having said that, pro-life is the concern of a militant minority which > >is a source of embarassment even to the small catholic parties, > >religion is largely irrelevant to the everyday life of the average > >Italian > > I don't think that the Italian women can say that such laws are irrelevant, > however. Not at all, nor are they for men, for that matter, What I mean is that popular support to anti-transhumanist, or pro-life, laws is minimal. Even the referendum against the law on IVF etc, was lost only because it was voided by the too few votes expressed, not because the anti-IVF had any majority support. Stefano Vaj From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 3 15:19:10 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:19:10 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Scientology Taking Hits Online (LA Times) Message-ID: <026d01c87d42$29a43500$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Looks like the evil cult's having a harder time these days. Good news: From: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/newmedia/la-et-scientology3mar03,0,4668513,full.story A Growing Number of Critics and Disgruntled Ex-members are Using the Web to Attack the Church's Tightly Controlled Image. By David Sarno, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer March 3, 2008. "We were born. We grew up. We escaped." So reads the motto of ExScientologyKids.com, a website launched Thursday by three young women raised in the Church of Scientology who are speaking out against the religion. Their website accuses the church of physical abuse, denying some children a proper education and alienating members from family. One of the women behind the site, Jenna Miscavige Hill, is the niece of David Miscavige, the head of the church, and Kendra Wiseman is the daughter of Bruce Wiseman, president of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a Scientology-sponsored organization opposed to the practice of psychiatry. The day before ExScientologyKids.com launched, another inflammatory allegation about the church began to circulate virulently online. "L. Ron Hubbard Plagiarized Scientology," read a headline at the popular Internet culture blog BoingBoing. The post linked to images of a translated 1934 German book called "Scientologie," which critics say contains similar themes to Hubbard's Scientology, which he codified in 1952, according to a church website. These were just the latest in a series of Scientology-related stories to burn across the Internet like grass fires in recent weeks, testing the church's well-established ability to tightly control its public image. The largest thorn in the church's side has been a group called Anonymous, a diffuse online coalition of skeptics, hackers and activists, many of them young and Web-savvy. The high-wattage movement has inspired former Scientologists to come forward and has repeatedly trained an Internet spotlight on any story or rumor that portrays Scientology in unflattering terms. No corner of the Web, it appears, is safe for Scientology. Blogger and lawyer Scott Pilutik recently posted a story noting that Scientology was yanking down EBay auctions for used e-meters, the device the church uses for spiritual counseling. EBay allows brand owners -- Louis Vuitton or Rolex, say -- to remove items they believe infringe on their trademark or patent rights. Basically, fakes. But, Pilutik said, the used e-meters being taken down were genuine. Reselling them was no different than putting a for-sale sign on your old Chevy. "What's actually going on here," he wrote, is that the church is "knowingly alleging intellectual property violations that clearly don't exist." Within a day Pilutik's blog had gotten over 45,000 visitors -- so much traffic that his site crashed completely. Facing a steady stream of negative publicity and a growing number of critical voices, Scientology has found itself on the defensive. The church has referred to Anonymous as a group of "cyber-terrorists" and, in a statement, said the group's aims were "reminiscent of Al Qaeda spreading anti-American hatred and calling for U.S. destruction." "These people are posing extremely serious death threats to our people," said church spokeswoman Karin Pouw in a phone interview. "We are talking about religious hatred and bigotry." A recent video posted to YouTube contained a threat to bomb a Southern California Scientology building. An FBI spokeswoman said an investigation was in progress but that no suspects had been identified. Reporters have long had to tread carefully when writing about Scientology, fearful that lawsuits and other kinds of retaliation would follow any story that Scientology did not like. But that may be changing. "Before this Internet onslaught," said Douglas Frantz, a contributing editor at Portfolio magazine who covered Scientology for the New York Times in the 1990s (and is a former editor at the L.A. Times), "they were always able to go after their critics and do a good job of being able to discredit or intimidate them." Angry former church members also perceive a kind of safety in numbers afforded by the Internet, and more are coming forward to share their stories. "People have been scared out of their minds to speak out about Scientology," said Hill, Miscavige's niece, in an interview. "Nobody should have to be that scared to speak out about a church." Wiseman echoed the sentiment, adding that the Anonymous campaign had influenced her decision to reveal her identity last week. "The Internet is listening. If something happens to me, all of these people will know." The current wave of anti-Scientology activity began in January, when a video of Tom Cruise extolling the religion's tech-based approach to enlightenment was leaked onto YouTube, where users holding it up to ridicule copied and recopied it; several sites posted it without hesitation. It wasn't long before Nick Denton, who as publisher of the blog syndicate Gawker Media had put the video online first, received a legal threat from a law firm representing Scientology, alleging copyright infringement. But Denton refused to take the video down. "It was an awesome news story," Denton wrote in an e-mail. "If we didn't race to post it up, some other site would have. That, rather than litigation by Scientology, was the fear going through my mind." The church's whack-a-mole campaign with the Cruise video became a rallying cry for Anonymous, which saw efforts to remove the videos from YouTube as an unwanted incursion into the domain of digital culture, where information and media, copyrighted or no, are often exchanged freely. In a YouTube video of its own, Anonymous declared open war on the church. Early on, the group also staged cyber-attacks on Scientology websites. But on Feb. 10, thousands of masked Anonymous members picketed at Scientology locations around the globe, chanting slogans and handing out fliers. No violent incidents were reported. The protests generated yet another wave of online media -- videos, photos, news stories, blog posts -- little of it in praise of Scientology. The result of all this attention has been that just about any story critical of Scientology -- even those that have been publicly accessible for years -- can gain immediate Web currency. On Digg.com, a popular "social news" aggregator that features popular stories from around the Web, dozens of Scientology stories have ascended to the site's most-viewed list in the last several weeks. A successful Digg story can drive tens of thousands of views to the originating site, as was the case with Pilutik's post about e-meters. In addition, the clamor generated by Anonymous has raised the profile of the small but vehement anti-Scientology community that existed before Anonymous, and even made for some cross-pollination between the two camps. Scientology's longtime detractors, such as those at Operation Clambake (xenu.net) and Scientology Lies, claim it is not a religion at all but a business that charges its parishioners ever more onerous fees for access to revealed truths. Other online forums, such as the Ex-Scientologist Message Board and ExScientologyKids, have become places for former members to congregate, share stories and offer support Ironically, it is the church's aversion to negative publicity -- and the legal strategy it has long used to prevent it, that has aroused more online ire than any other issue. The website ChillingEffects .com has posted dozens of cease-and-desist letters sent by Scientology's lawyers to various website and Internet service providers requesting that copyrighted material be removed. But in the diffuse and often Byzantine world of the Web, some precision legal strikes are more likely to backfire than hit their target. Scientology's use of copyright law appears to be an increasingly losing battle on the Web, said Andrew Bridges, a San Francisco-based intellectual property attorney. "The big question is: Is the copyright serving the purpose of promoting science and the useful arts, or is the purpose essentially the stifling of criticism?" Still, according to Scientology spokeswoman Pouw, the church views the Internet as a positive tool. It is, Pouw said, "concentrating on using the Internet as a resource for promoting its message and mission in this world, not as a ground for litigation." But now that goal will have to exist alongside a seemingly steady stream of online attacks. And while anonymous political activity, such as postering around a town, is nothing new, Bridges noted, the speed of the Web is what is giving Scientology trouble. "What's different is that more people can see the stuff faster than Scientology can go around and get it taken down." From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 3 15:26:27 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:26:27 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Plants Apparently Using Quantum Computing (Apr 2007) Message-ID: <028401c87d43$913bdf00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Sorry if this is old news, but it blew me away: http://www.chemlin.net/news/2007/apr2007/photosynthesis.htm Excerpt: "Electronic spectroscopy measurements made on a femtosecond(millionths of a billionth of a second) time-scale showed these oscillations meeting and interfering constructively, forming wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can explore all potential energy pathways simultaneously and reversibly, meaning they can retreat from wrong pathways with no penalty. This finding contradicts the classical description of the photosynthetic energy transfer process as one in which excitation energy hops from light-capturing pigment molecules to reaction center molecules step-by-step down the molecular energy ladder." Full story with nice picture: http://www.chemlin.net/news/2007/apr2007/photosynthesis.htm. Full story text: BERKELEY, CA - Through photosynthesis, green plants and cyanobacteria are able to transfer sunlight energy to molecular reaction centers for conversion into chemical energy with nearly 100-percent efficiency. Speed is the key - the transfer of the solar energy takes place almost instantaneously so little energy is wasted as heat. How photosynthesis achieves this near instantaneous energy transfer is a long-standing mystery that may have finally been solved. A study led by researchers with the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the University of California (UC) at Berkeley reports that the answer lies in quantum mechanical effects. Results of the study was presented in the April 12, 2007 issue of the journal Nature. "We have obtained the first direct evidence that remarkably long-lived wavelike electronic quantum coherence plays an important part in energy transfer processes during photosynthesis," said Graham Fleming, the principal investigator for the study. "This wavelike characteristic can explain the extreme efficiency of the energy transfer because it enables the system to simultaneously sample all the potential energy pathways and choose the most efficient one." Fleming is the Deputy Director of Berkeley Lab, a professor of chemistry at UC Berkeley, and an internationally acclaimed leader in spectroscopic studies of the photosynthetic process. In a paper entitled, Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems, he and his collaborators report the detection of "quantum beating" signals, coherent electronic oscillations in both donor and acceptor molecules, generated by light-induced energy excitations, like the ripples formed when stones are tossed into a pond. Electronic spectroscopy measurements made on a femtosecond (millionths of a billionth of a second) time-scale showed these oscillations meeting and interfering constructively, forming wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can explore all potential energy pathways simultaneously and reversibly, meaning they can retreat from wrong pathways with no penalty. This finding contradicts the classical description of the photosynthetic energy transfer process as one in which excitation energy hops from light-capturing pigment molecules to reaction center molecules step-by-step down the molecular energy ladder. "The classical hopping description of the energy transfer process is both inadequate and inaccurate," said Fleming. "It gives the wrong picture of how the process actually works, and misses a crucial aspect of the reason for the wonderful efficiency." Co-authoring the Nature paper with Fleming were Gregory Engel, who was first author, Tessa Calhoun, Elizabeth Read, Tae-Kyu Ahn, Tomas Mancal and Yuan-Chung Cheng, all of whom held joint appointments with Berkeley Lab's Physical Biosciences Division and the UC Berkeley Chemistry Department at the time of the study, plus Robert Blankenship, from the Washington University in St. Louis. The photosynthetic technique for transferring energy from one molecular system to another should make any short-list of Mother Nature's spectacular accomplishments. If we can learn enough to emulate this process, we might be able to create artificial versions of photosynthesis that would help us effectively tap into the sun as a clean, efficient, sustainable and carbon-neutral source of energy. Towards this end, Fleming and his research group have developed a technique called two-dimensional electronic spectroscopy that enables them to follow the flow of light-induced excitation energy through molecular complexes with femtosecond temporal resolution. The technique involves sequentially flashing a sample with femtosecond pulses of light from three laser beams. A fourth beam is used as a local oscillator to amplify and detect the resulting spectroscopic signals as the excitation energy from the laser lights is transferred from one molecule to the next. (The excitation energy changes the way each molecule absorbs and emits light.) Fleming has compared 2-D electronic spectroscopy to the technique used in the early super-heterodyne radios, where an incoming high frequency radio signal was converted by an oscillator to a lower frequency for more controllable amplification and better reception. In the case of 2-D electronic spectroscopy, scientists can track the transfer of energy between molecules that are coupled (connected) through their electronic and vibrational states in any photoactive system, macromolecular assembly or nanostructure. Fleming and his group first described 2-D electronic spectroscopy in a 2005 Nature paper, when they used the technique to observe electronic couplings in the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) photosynthetic light-harvesting protein, a molecular complex in green sulphur bacteria. Said Engel, "The 2005 paper was the first biological application of this technique, now we have used 2-D electronic spectroscopy to discover a new phenomenon in photosynthetic systems. While the possibility that photosynthetic energy transfer might involve quantum oscillations was first suggested more than 70 years ago, the wavelike motion of excitation energy had never been observed until now." As in the 2005 paper, the FMO protein was again the target. FMO is considered a model system for studying photosynthetic energy transfer because it consists of only seven pigment molecules and its chemistry has been well characterized. "To observe the quantum beats, 2-D spectra were taken at 33 population times, ranging from 0 to 660 femtoseconds," said Engel. "In these spectra, the lowest-energy exciton (a bound electron-hole pair formed when an incoming photon boosts an electron out of the valence energy band into the conduction band) gives rise to a diagonal peak near 825 nanometers that clearly oscillates. The associated cross-peak amplitude also appears to oscillate. Surprisingly, this quantum beating lasted the entire 660 femtoseconds." Engel said the duration of the quantum beating signals was unexpected because the general scientific assumption had been that the electronic coherences responsible for such oscillations are rapidly destroyed. "For this reason, the transfer of electronic coherence between excitons during relaxation has usually been ignored," Engel said. "By demonstrating that the energy transfer process does involve electronic coherence and that this coherence is much stronger than we would ever have expected, we have shown that the process can be much more efficient than the classical view could explain. However, we still don't know to what degree photosynthesis benefits from these quantum effects." Engel said one of the next steps for the Fleming group in this line of research will be to look at the effects of temperature changes on the photosynthetic energy transfer process. The results for this latest paper in Nature were obtained from FMO complexes kept at 77 Kelvin. The group will also be looking at broader bandwidths of energy using different colors of light pulses to map out everything that is going on, not just energy transfer. Ultimately, the idea is to gain a much better understanding how Nature not only transfers energy from one molecular system to another, but is also able to convert it into useful forms. "Nature has had about 2.7 billion years to perfect photosynthesis, so there are huge lessons that remain for us to learn," Engel said. "The results we're reporting in this latest paper, however, at least give us a new way to think about the design of future artificial photosynthesis systems." From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 3 15:51:54 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Stefano Vaj: >Even the referendum against the law on IVF >etc, was lost only because it was voided by the too few votes >expressed, not because the anti-IVF had any majority support. Are you sure? I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you answer? The only answer I have is that the Vatican was extremely effective in that campaign. I still have my brochure from 'the Committee of Science and Life' that arrived in my mailbox. I still remember the posters up all over my town from them telling people not to vote. I remember *my scientific colleagues not voting*, telling me that the assisted reproductive technology laws were 'too wild' and 'needed to be controlled'. Of course I couldn't vote myself, because I was an illegal immigrant Italian government astronomer. In a country where the voting turnout is typically ~85%, in the mother and family-oriented Italian culture, how could a set of draconian laws that marginalizes women and family choices, and was delivered by an extremely unpopular prime minister, be extinguished so easily? If you can answer that, then you know what challenges the AIT (and the larger body of Transhumanists) have in front of them. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 16:00:48 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:00:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM, estropico wrote: > In my opinion this is a PR disaster waiting to happen. So far, the only PR annoyances we are suffering are the embarassing implications deriving by your using the word "estropico" for neocon propaganda and from your maniacal and almost solitary witch hunt, which in any event has been sofar met with a remarkable lack of interest by the media and the public, in spite of the AIT's substantial exposure of the last couple of years and your restless efforts. And you and Wolin will pardon me if I woud rather be associated any day with the alleged "unreason" of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Baudrillard or Lyotard than with Mr. Pelanda's or Mr. Wolfovitz's dubious crusades. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 16:14:58 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:14:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803030814u6027dc40t560fd2debefcbb5e@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > Stefano Vaj: > >Even the referendum against the law on IVF > >etc, was lost only because it was voided by the too few votes > >expressed, not because the anti-IVF had any majority support. > > Are you sure? This is what the figures testify... The great majority of those who voted voted in favour of the abrogation of the law. > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: > Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you > answer? Mmhhh. Lack of information? Censorship by mainstream media? Cultural limits? Insufficient mobilisation or blatant betrayal of the forces who should theoretically have supported the referendum? Fear of the swinging catholic 4-5% in the upcoming elections (rumors say that the election of Mr. Prodi as the Italian prime minister was offered by the church in exchange for the renouncing of the center-left to fight that battle as it was requested to do by most of its militants...)? The clever presentation of the law by its supporters as something concerning only couples with fertility problems (in fact it forbids almost all kinds of human reproductive or genetic technology)? > The only answer I have is that the Vatican was extremely effective in > that campaign. I still have my brochure from 'the Committee of Science > and Life' that arrived in my mailbox. I still remember the posters up > all over my town from them telling people not to vote. I remember *my > scientific colleagues not voting*, telling me that the assisted > reproductive technology laws were 'too wild' and 'needed to be > controlled'. Yes, this was also a factor. But please keep in mind that one need not be persuaded not to vote - rather the contrary. If you do not care one way or another, you do not vote, period. Thus, silence on the issue was at least as effective as negative propaganda. Thus, the minority of people actively supporting that prohibitionist law had just to bet on the disinformation or passivity of the majority of the Italian voters. If, as in Switzerland, referendums are valid irrespective of the number of voters, it would have been veeeeeeeeeery difficult for the Vatican to get a number sufficient of voters to say "no" to the abrogation of that law. In fact, "no" votes were almost non-existent. Stefano Vaj From scerir at libero.it Mon Mar 3 16:21:11 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:21:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Plants Apparently Using Quantum Computing (Apr 2007) References: <028401c87d43$913bdf00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <3cfb01c87d4a$9b6d69b0$e5961f97@archimede> Lee writes: > Sorry if this is old news, but it blew me away: > http://www.chemlin.net/news/2007/apr2007/photosynthesis.htm Here is another report http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/27582 That quantum effects (essentially superposition and entanglement,which is another kind of superposition, and quantum beats, that is to say superposition in time) may play a role at a mesoscopic scale is more than probable. After all there is just one physics in this world, and we all live in a subtle bath made of quantum fields or of quantum particles (but they are the same thing). http://www.physorg.com/news113824784.html From jonkc at att.net Mon Mar 3 16:24:52 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 11:24:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: Message-ID: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> Robert Bradbury Wrote: > I believe the production of an AGI spells > the extinction of humanity. Me too. > Why should I expend intellectual energy, > time, money, etc. in a doomed species? If you don't want to develop an AI somebody else certainly will, there is too much money and power involved for such a possibility to be ignored, not to mention the adrenalin high creating such a godlike being would bring. And if you're the first to make an AI you would have more control (very small but larger than zero) over future events than the person who came in second. It may also give these developers some comfort to know that even if they or their children do not survive their mind children will. > those of you who have had and/or are investing > in children are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. Sucks doesn't it? Still, things aren't completely hopeless, just almost hopeless. If you or your biological children have any wish to survive they must shed the silly superstitions regarding identity and consciousness that is epidemic in society and even infects most members of this list. If they can do that then there would be no reason not to upload and engage in pedal to the metal upgrading, and if they are also very lucky they might survive. > And so, we must present transhumanism > as an "Extinction Level Event" Yes. > are willing to deal with thiat? Well, it's not like we had any choice over the matter. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 17:07:04 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:07:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku Message-ID: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> I'm glad books like this are around for my kids. I've got it on pre-order. PJ http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-bk-lippincott2mar02,0,5225927.story >From the Los Angeles Times BOOK REVIEW 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku A scientific exploration into the world of phasers, force fields, teleportation and time travel. By Sara Lippincott March 2, 2008 Physics of the Impossible A Scientific Exploration into the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation, and Time Travel Michio Kaku Doubleday: 330 pp., $26.95 "The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and . . . the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote." Thus did A.A. Michelson, America's first Nobel science laureate, sum up the consensus of the world's physicists. It was 1894 -- six years before the birth of quantum theory and 11 years before the special theory of relativity. Michio Kaku, in his new book, "Physics of the Impossible," quotes Michelson to warn us that nothing should be considered impossible or beyond our ken. "In my own short lifetime," he writes, "I have seen the seemingly impossible become established fact over and over again." A professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York, Kaku is a tireless science popularizer -- author of, among other books, "Parallel Worlds," "Beyond Einstein" and the bestselling "Hyperspace" -- and thoroughly committed to bringing scientific illiterates into the light. He does physics too; he pioneered string field theory and is now working on the fabled Theory of Everything (a satisfactory union of gravity with the three other fundamental forces: electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces). His new book's intent and tone are nicely encapsulated in its subtitle, "A Scientific Exploration into the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation, and Time Travel." This book would be read, optimally, at age 14 -- up in your bedroom on a stormy Saturday, with the house quiet and rain drumming against the windows. It's science as escapist literature. Kaku divides the "seemingly impossible" into three classes. Class I consists of technologies that "might be possible in this century," including "teleportation, antimatter engines, certain forms of telepathy, psychokinesis, and invisibility." Class II awaits the wisdom we will have acquired in "millennia to millions of years in the future" and includes time machines, hyperspace travel and popping through wormholes in space into another universe. Class III -- well, don't hold your breath. This class, a short one, contains but two candidates, neither of which made the subtitle: the hoary "perpetual motion machine," which crackpots have been working on for hundreds of years, and precognition (efforts dating back to the Greeks). Of these, Kaku concludes that if "they do turn out to be possible, they would represent a fundamental shift in our understanding of physics." Mighty few theoretical physicists would bother expounding some of these possible impossibilities, and Kaku is to be congratulated for doing so, even if what he accomplishes here is only to get the juices of future physicists flowing. It's too late for me, but I was vastly entertained to learn, for instance, that scientists have already succeeded in levitating frogs and that a possible "invisibility cloak," ? la Harry Potter, while rendering you invisible, would not allow you to see anything once you were wrapped up in it, thus vitiating its usefulness. Kaku is nothing if not accessible. His website invites you to send him your own theory of everything, asking only that you summarize it in a paragraph. He notes (wistfully and endearingly) that "I simply do not have time for proposals where the main idea is spread over many pages." God bless him. * sara.lippincott at latimes.com Sara Lippincott is an assistant editor for Book Review From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 17:20:22 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:20:22 -0800 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: Abbott's 'Flatland' vs. the animated film version Message-ID: <29666bf30803030920j1472fa92r6776225f4296f955@mail.gmail.com> This week's Sunday book review section revealed two classic satires I've never read, but should have: "Flatland" (and the "Flashman" series by George MacDonald Fraser, which is not H+ or extropic in the least, but is brutal anti-imperial historical satire and therefore right up my alley). Regarding "Flatland, apparently neither of the movie versions embrace the satire of the original. My father was right. Too many books, too little time. PJ http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-bk-wertheim2mar02,0,7981806.story >From the Los Angeles Times BOOK REVIEW It's a flat, flat, flat, flat world The text of Abbott's 1884 novella 'Flatland' and the screenplay of the latest animated film version. By Margaret Wertheim March 2, 2008 Flatland The Movie Edition Edwin A. Abbott, with Thomas Banchoff and the filmmakers of "Flatland" Princeton University Press: 168 pp., $15 IN 1884, the English mathematician Edwin Abbott Abbott published an enchanting fable set in a two-dimensional world he called Flatland. Within this planar universe live triangles, squares, hexagons and other polygonal beings, who go about their business within a mere two degrees of freedom, working, playing and carrying on the processes of government without the luxury of depth. The hero and narrator, one A. Square, is a modest fellow, rather low down in the social hierarchy of Flatland but intellectually curious and a bit of a mathematician at heart. He likes to think about numbers and shapes, and at times he wonders whether there isn't, somehow, more to reality than meets the eye. In A. Square's dexterously naive voice, addressed to "the Reader," we learn about the physics, physiology, educational system, history, governance and social hierarchy that pertain in his two-dimensional, Euclidean domain. Here, a rigid pecking order reigns: The more sides a citizen has, the higher is his class. Thus Triangles are the lowest class, with Isosceles even lower than Equilaterals; next come Squares, who serve as clerks, scribes and other literate functionaries; then Pentagons and Hexagons, who make up the professionals (physicians, lawyers); and so on up to the "infinitely-sided" Circles, the priestly and noble classes. All this is delivered with the earnestness of a convert; toward the end of the tale, we learn that A. Square has been inducted into the mysteries of the Third Dimension by a magnificent stranger in the form of a Sphere. Under Lord Sphere's guidance, he has been vouchsafed a glimpse of the vast, expanded cosmos of three-dimensional space, herein known as Spaceland, in which reside the transcendently excellent figures of Cubes, higher-dimensional versions of his own lowly form. Like so many other heroes who have seen the light of a higher order, from Jesus to Galileo, A. Square will suffer greatly for the illumination he offers his fellow citizens. In Flatland, any discussion of a third dimension is heresy, punishable by imprisonment or death. Indeed, A. Square narrates from prison, where he has been confined for the past seven years, having failed to stifle his enthusiasm over what he witnessed during his brief time in Spaceland. To many students of mathematics, "Flatland" stands alongside "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" as one of the most beloved stories of the modern age. Like Charles Dodgson (Lewis Carroll), Abbott was able to transform complex mathematical ideas -- in this case, an emerging understanding of multidimensional space -- into a fantastical story at once whimsical and serious, which, by confounding genre, remains as fresh and appealing as when it was first published. Just as the Alice tales have done, "Flatland" has inspired many imitators and renditions in other media. Among its "sequels" are "Sphereland" (1965) by Dionys Burger; "The Planiverse" (1984) by A.K. Dewdney, mathematical games columnist for Scientific American; "Flatterland" (2001) by English mathematician Ian Stewart; and "Spaceland" (2002) by U.S. mathematician Rudy Rucker. In an episode of "Cosmos," Carl Sagan used "Flatland" to explain higher-dimensional spaces, and in a 1960s episode of "The Outer Limits," a character named Eck visited humans from his own two-dimensional world. In 1965, Dudley Moore narrated the first animated film version, which was followed by a second film in 1982, directed by mathematician Michele Emmer. There has even been an opera -- "VAS: An Opera in Flatland" (2002) by Steve Tomasula. My favorite theatrical rendition is a delightful puppet opera by Randall Wong, performed here last year at the Museum of Jurassic Technology. Last year also saw the production of not one but two new film versions, the first a full-length animated feature directed by Ladd Ehlinger Jr., updating the story from Victorian England to contemporary America, and the second a 30-minute animation starring the voices of Martin Sheen, Kristen Bell and Michael York, which has just been released on DVD. Accompanying the latter is "Flatland: The Movie Edition," published by Princeton University Press, in which we get Abbott's novella plus the script of the movie, along with an introduction by Brown University mathematics professor Thomas Banchoff and commentary by the film's writer and producer (Seth Caplan), director (Jeffrey Travis) and chief animator (Dano Johnson). All movies of beloved stories must struggle against the preconceptions of their fans, and I will be honest in confessing that as soon as I laid eyes on the lush color graphics in the Princeton book my heart began to sink. I first read "Flatland" when I was studying mathematics at Sydney University 25 years ago and fell in love with its subtle blend of fantasy, pedagogy and satire. Reading it again a quarter-century later, I was particularly struck by Abbott's incisive skewering of class-bound Victorian society, and particularly by his parodic rendition of Victorian attitudes to women. In "Flatland," women are the lowest class of all, being merely straight lines with no area at all, and hence literally no space for brains. When Flatland was first published, some readers misunderstood Abbott's point and accused him of misogyny, whereas in fact he was a brilliant teacher who supported the cause of women's education. Beneath its fairy-tale trappings, "Flatland" was a subversive piece of social commentary, and it wasn't written for little children. The makers of the new film have stripped this multifaceted story of much of its depth and reduced it to a bland, rather saccharine lesson. The basic educational message -- about one-, two-, three-, and possibly higher-dimensional spaces -- is intact, but the social satire is gone. Instead, we get a simplified story in which there is little ambiguity about who is "good" and who is "bad." A. Square has been given a mathematically inclined granddaughter named Hex, who is a hexagon, and it is she who first plants in his mind the idea of a third dimension. (This has a parallel in the original, where A. Square has a smart hexagonal grandson.) Although it's nice to see a female character taking a mathematical lead, the very power of satire is in revealing what it is apparently obscuring. Hex's intellectual perkiness comes off as a politically correct gesture, as do several other simplifications in aspects of the film, which seems aimed at a primary-school audience. The filmmakers have made admirablye attempteds to inform the look of "Flatland: The Movie" with mathematical motifs, such as fractals, but I wish they'd paid less attention to visual effects and more to the texture of the story. Sadly, this is a very flattened version of Flatland. If you want to experience the full depth of this miniature masterpiece, pick up "The Annotated Flatland," with notes by Stewart. Its multidimensional treasures will leave you as starry-eyed as A. Square himself. Margaret Wertheim is the author of "The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace: A History of Space From Dante to the Internet." From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 17:38:22 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:38:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.co m> References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> At 05:00 PM 3/3/2008 +0100, Stefano Vaj wrote: >I woud rather be associated any >day with the alleged "unreason" of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Baudrillard >or Lyotard than with Mr. Pelanda's or Mr. Wolfovitz's dubious >crusades. That is hardly the only choice. And frankly, I'd rather be associated with Peter and the Wolf, or the three blind mice, or Huey, Dewey and Louie, than with Heidegger the Nazi or Baudrillard the glossolaliac. Damien Broderick From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 17:51:02 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:51:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803030951u303dd578t73d1053dd6c7f6d2@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Damien Broderick > That is hardly the only choice. And frankly, I'd rather be associated > with Peter and the Wolf, or the three blind mice, or Huey, Dewey and > Louie, than with Heidegger the Nazi or Baudrillard the glossolaliac. Ditto for Peter and the Wolf, but they were not in the multiple choice... :-) Having said that, and seriously, both Heidegger and Baudrillard have a marked penchant for what may well be interpreted in terms neoluddism and antiprometheism. So, while there are here and there ambiguous pieces and bits that can also serve a H+ fight, I frankly would be the first to hesitate to recommend them as points of reference to all of us. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 17:56:40 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:56:40 +0100 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:07 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > I'm glad books like this are around for my kids. I've got it on pre-order. Should I understand it as an unqualified recommendation? The presentation and the subject sound very interesting, but I was disappointed by other Kaku books, even though I believe I recorded a few of them in the Universal Transhumanist Bibliography at http://www.transumanisti.it/8.asp... Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 18:01:26 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:01:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: Abbott's 'Flatland' vs. the animated film version In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803030920j1472fa92r6776225f4296f955@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030920j1472fa92r6776225f4296f955@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803031001i404418a8s912889ac50cea560@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:20 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > This week's Sunday book review section revealed two classic satires > I've never read, but should have: "Flatland" > Flatland is very brief, utterly transhumanist and "upwinger" in spirit, and last but not least available in a free, full-text Web version, at http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/eaa/FL.HTM and probably elsewhere. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 18:07:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:07:36 -0600 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.co m> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> At 09:07 AM 3/3/2008 -0800, PJ quoted from an LA Times review: >Class III -- well, >don't hold your breath. This class, a short one, contains but two >candidates, neither of which made the subtitle: the hoary "perpetual >motion machine," which crackpots have been working on for hundreds of >years, and precognition (efforts dating back to the Greeks). Of these, >Kaku concludes that if "they do turn out to be possible, they would >represent a fundamental shift in our understanding of physics." I have to make my boringly familiar point: this second allegedly impossible physics-shattering phenomenon is routinely observed in parapsychology labs (on a stochastic basis), and the few physicists who've tried to find some explanation for precognition usually claim that it is quite consistent with accepted physics--perhaps, in fact, required by the canon, which is almost entirely time symmetrical. Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Mon Mar 3 19:09:19 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:09:19 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com><580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <005201c87d62$16682490$9a961f97@archimede> > That is hardly the only choice. And frankly, I'd rather be associated > with Peter and the Wolf, or the three blind mice, or Huey, Dewey and > Louie, than with Heidegger the Nazi or Baudrillard the glossolaliac. > Damien Broderick Our great poet Gabriele D'Annunzio, glossomaniac, daredevil, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriele_D'Annunzio fascist, maybe futurist, inventor of brands like 'il Parrozzo', 'il Senzanome', 'Aurum', and much much more, born 30 miles from here (ahem), wrote a story about a fascist ?bermensch. As far as I remember, the peculiar character of his ?bermenschism wasn't just the anti-democracy, the force, the power, the war, and so on, but the beauty and the sexual voluptousness .... Is there enough room for a neo-decadentist transhumanism? From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 19:34:49 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 11:34:49 -0800 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Should I understand it as an unqualified recommendation? The presentation > and the subject sound very interesting, but I was disappointed by other Kaku > books, even though I believe I recorded a few of them in the Universal > Transhumanist Bibliography at http://www.transumanisti.it/8.asp... No. Even the reviewer said it's the kind of book for 14 year olds to read under the covers, as they dream of future possibilities. I suspect you are older than 14... ;-) PJ From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 19:35:50 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 11:35:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: Abbott's 'Flatland' vs. the animated film version In-Reply-To: <580930c20803031001i404418a8s912889ac50cea560@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030920j1472fa92r6776225f4296f955@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803031001i404418a8s912889ac50cea560@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803031135k29ae8238g1a0323a7888710f@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Flatland is very brief, utterly transhumanist and "upwinger" in spirit, and > last but not least available in a free, full-text Web version, at > http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/eaa/FL.HTM and probably elsewhere. Thanks for the link! PJ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 20:07:00 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:07:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? WAS: Manifesto of Italian transhumanists In-Reply-To: <005201c87d62$16682490$9a961f97@archimede> References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> <005201c87d62$16682490$9a961f97@archimede> Message-ID: <580930c20803031207l783d7087v30b50aab2be56a0a@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:09 PM, scerir wrote: > As far as I remember, the peculiar character of his ?bermenschism > wasn't just the anti-democracy, the force, the power, the war, > and so on, but the beauty and the sexual voluptousness .... > Is there enough room for a neo-decadentist transhumanism? > It may be of interest, by the way, to note that the D'Annunzio had himself a late but explicit fling with a kind-of, ante-litteram, transhumanism, namely in the novel *Forse che s?, forse che no*("It May Be, It May Be Not", or "Perhaps Yes, Perhaps No") where he celebrates, Marinetti-style, the speed and the merger between the Man and the Machine, and the overcoming of human limitations through technology... :-) I do not know if an English translation of the novel is available. In German it is known as *Vielleicht, vielleicht auch nicht*, while a French translationexists under the original Italian title. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 20:08:20 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:08:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803031208h1da2c83em86b117620c3c8642@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:34 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > I suspect you are older than 14... ;-) > Somewhat older, yes, in spite of an aggressive nutritional supplementation programme... :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 20:41:03 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:41:03 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Neo-fascist transhumanists? In-Reply-To: <580930c20803031207l783d7087v30b50aab2be56a0a@mail.gmail.co m> References: <4eaaa0d90803030135x6a1d0de8x499de94af763c641@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030800n19cd08b0q9466f4aa535e52d1@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303112933.021de158@satx.rr.com> <005201c87d62$16682490$9a961f97@archimede> <580930c20803031207l783d7087v30b50aab2be56a0a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303143710.023c68c8@satx.rr.com> At 09:07 PM 3/3/2008 +0100, Stefano Vaj wrote: >It may be of interest, by the way, to note that the D'Annunzio had >himself a late but explicit fling with a kind-of, ante-litteram, transhumanism In "English" poststructural academese that would be "avant la lettre." :) That is, "before the word or phrase existed, or had currency." Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 3 20:50:23 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:50:23 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj In-Reply-To: <580930c20803031208h1da2c83em86b117620c3c8642@mail.gmail.co m> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803031208h1da2c83em86b117620c3c8642@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303144608.0224ba70@satx.rr.com> Given all the angst flying about, I wonder if Dr. Vaj might provide us with some background? Google's usual amusing translation provides a bio note to his BIOPOLITICA (Barbarossa Publishing Company, 2005 Milan): ============================= THE AUTHOR: Stefano Vaj, Milan and known professional lecturer at the University of Padua, deals with metapolitica, vision of the world in scientific and cultural news from the end of the seventies. From positions resolutely identity, and postmodern sovrumaniste it writes well over the years in various languages, on the Free Men, The Journal Ticinese, Ecole Nouvelle, La Padania, Literature-Customs, Rebirth, Intervention, The Ring, Federalism, Transumanar , dissent and the Candido. On the same themes, in addition to intensive activities lecturer, translator (eg system to kill the people of Guillaume Faye [Web]), editor (eg Definitions Giorgio Locchi) and publicist, has published numerous essays, including Legality and legitimacy in the Italian legal (ContrOpinione), and Konrad Lorenz etologia (Man free), Survey on Human Rights. Genealogia di una morale (LEdE) [ versione Web ], La tecnica, l'uomo e il futuro (l'Uomo libero). Genealogy of a moral (LEdE) [Web] technology, man and the future (free man). Already responsible for the Italian S?cretariat Etudes et Recherches the Groupement Etudes et de Recherche pour la Civilisation Europ?enne (GRECE) and secretary of the circle Milan Fourth Time, the animated with Faye Collectif de R?flexion sur le Monde Contemporain, and is now a member of the 'Association Italian Transumanisti and member of the cultural Insubre Earth. Vari altri scritti dell'autore disponibili sul Web sono elencati qui . Several of the other writings available on the Web are listed here. From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 22:26:29 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 23:26:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Before the letter and Psi Message-ID: <580930c20803031426n166331e3m864a2d19a9b1368f@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > In "English" poststructural academese that would be "avant la lettre." :) > I see. For an Italian cultured mother-tongue speaker, this is still understandable, but he would find Latin phrase more usual... By the way, are you the same Damien Broderick of *Outside the Gates of Science *, which I have finished just minutes ago? Because near the end there are a few transhumanist references, and I have a vague recollection of having heard it mentioned on some list or other... If you are, congratulations. A very disconcerting and well-researched book. I personally switched from blind, albeit strictly materialistic, faith in psi when I was a teenager, to skepticism, back to the general impression that some more in-depth and/or large scale research would be in order. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 22:53:57 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 23:53:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Background Message-ID: <580930c20803031453y5002cac0r2c24dda75018d6d5@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Given all the angst flying about, I wonder if Dr. > Vaj might provide us with some background? > Google's usual amusing translation provides a bio > note to his BIOPOLITICA (Barbarossa Publishing Company, 2005 Milan): > What can I say? I am a practising Italian lawyer and a law professor at the University of Padua in New Technologies Law, and in my spare time I have been authoring or translating for years a number of essays and shorter articles, published in volume or in very diverse publications and newspapers, a few of them concern technology, philosophy and biopolitics and promote, in broad terms, prometheism, the posthuman change, and anti-prohibitionism with regard to biotech. At a point in time this made me get in touch with the WTA, especially since I became curious to explore not just the bio, "wet" transhumanist topics, but also the hard, "cyber" ones; and eventually I contributed with a few friends to the legalisation and rather dramatic growth of its Italian chapter, the Associazione Italiana Transumanisti, which had already been informally in place for a couple of years (something that was not really appreciated by a few Italian old-timers with very idiosincratic and sectarian agendas; hence their reiterated, bitter defamatory campaigns). In the process, I worked together with other AIT members to the establishment of a Universal Transhumanist Bibliography (available on the AIT's Web site linked above), to the publication of a rather academic H+ paper in Italian called *Divenire*, the first issue of which should be in print in a few weeks, and to the Manifesto that was initially mentioned by Giulio Prisco and is currently being translated by Riccardo Campa, its main author. Through all that, I met Natasha, who was kind enough to encourage me to subscribe to ExI chat list, as I not-so-recently-any-more did. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Mar 3 23:59:09 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:59:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Medical Costs In-Reply-To: References: <391783.21192.qm@web65402.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <16ea01c872b2$9ab9c470$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7641ddc60802221530s14e9776euaaa15600c4f4f4aa@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60802271504h2f7b7949seb023bbae1d4c1e3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803031559t3776751fqa96ab5ff4843bfbb@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > The feedback loops in large organisations are not that different > whether the organisation is public or private. ### Really, they are. More specifically, the largest difference is between non-monopolistic organizations controlled through the price mechanism, and monopolistic organizations which do not use the price mechanism. The price mechanism with exit option acts as a truthful conduit and integrator of information with a feedback delay directly related to product cycle. No society has ever discovered a more precise and faster feedback mechanism for the organization of economic activity than prices. ---------------------------------------------------------- If the cleaner doesn't > do a good job, customers or other staff bring it to the attention of > his supervisor, who either tries to make him work harder or argues to > his superiors that more cleaners need to be employed. If a bad > decision is made - too much or not enough money spent employing > cleaners, or too many incompetent cleaners employed - this comes to > the attention of management further up. ### What catches managerial attention of a profit-driven entity is the bottom line. Customer complaints are analyzed only insofar as they indicate problems that could lead to financial losses, which tend to be immediate, and roughly proportional to the volume of complaints. Customer complaints in politically controlled entities are irrelevant unless they reach the power-wielders in a sufficient amount as to have an impact on their ability to stay in power (i.e. the strength of feedback is not proportional to the number of dissatisfied patients), and tend to have very long feedback delay, measured in years. These are large differences. -------------------------------------------------------- > By it reaches the board of > directors it will have become very serious, affecting sales, customer > complaint levels, or some other outcome measure. Some work will need > to be done to determine why exactly the customers are leaving or why > the incidence of gastroenteritis has increased. Ultimately, if things > are handled badly enough, the shareholders/electors can vote to sack > the board of directors. ### Exit option for patients is almost immediate in a private system, extremely limited or absent in a state system. Absent in the sense you can't ever stop paying, even if you are dead, since money will be taken from your inheritance as estate taxes. Limited in the sense that you can't go to a different, independent hospital system without paying double. This is a huge difference. More generally, *within* a private organization, especially a large one, you may have feedback mechanisms that are similar to state ones, that's why large companies, like GM, may ossify and no longer act nimbly to serve the customer. However, the loops operating *between* a competitive organization and its customers are based on price, supply, demand, and easy exit, which is how they differ from states. ---------------------------------------------------- > Maybe a combination of private (to provide competition) and public (to > guarantee a basic standard) is the ideal. ### Do you think you need state control of facilities (and their prices) to guarantee a basic standard? Or do you need only the state as a payor of last resort? These are two distinct positions. I disagree strongly with the former, and largely disagree with the latter. I also disagree with the need to have a basic standard (i.e. a guaranteed minimum of access to medical care). ---------------------------------- > Good for you: you should always question propaganda. But your life > would not necessarily have been any better had you lived in one of the > many poor, disorganised countries where the propaganda (and the > prisons, and the death squads) was intended for the evil socialists. ### The enemy of my enemy is *not* my friend! :) I know that socialists have been persecuted, tortured and killed by some of their enemies. Persecuting communists doesn't automatically make you good in my book (although supporting them makes you bad). What I am arguing for is not simply absence of socialism, which is only one form of evil, but rather a principled rejection of violence. That implies a principled rejection of the legitimacy of taxation. ------------------------------------------------------------ There are many commercial situations where you can't readily go to > someone else, for example if you live in an apartment building and you > don't agree with the way it is being renovated. You could move, but at > great cost and inconvenience. ### But the cost is not actively imposed on you by violent means. You have orders of magnitude more choice among apartment lessors than among tax assessors, and the latter cost about an order of magnitude more. ------------------------------------------- > But yes, if you can't > afford anything else, and you don't like the variety of the food on > offer, there is probably no immediate personal gain from complaining. > It's better not to be poor, if you can help it. ### People who are not taxed tend to get richer than those who are, ceteris paribus. ------------------------------------------------- Oddly enough, the Australian taxation system penalises high income > earners who don't take out private health insurance: they pay a higher > tax rate, which can work out to many times more than the cost of the > insurance depending on income, so people have an incentive to take out > insurance even if they don't think they need it. This was brought in > as an attempt to curtail public health spending by shifting some of > the burden to the private sector. ### Jeez, so not only you are being fleeced but you can't get even a bit of the losses back by using the services made possible with your money! This adds a whole another layer of injury. ----------------------------------------------------------- > The result has not been that public > hospitals are left in the dust by their private counterparts. The only > real advantage of private insurance has traditionally been quicker > access to some types of elective surgery, such as joint replacement. > But even this has changed as public patients have been demanding > quicker service, perhaps comparing themselves to their private > counterparts. In terms of research, handling of complicated cases, > innovative techniques and general prestige, the large public hospitals > are still way ahead. ### If you have access to extorted monies you can grow much bigger than somebody who has to earn his keep (and keep paying taxes). ------------------------------------------------------------- > The Australian PBS > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Benefits_Scheme) is not a > monopsony. Australia is a small market by world standards and drug > companies are free not to release drugs in that market if they feel it > isn't profitable, or to release them on a private script only basis. > You may as well accuse pharmacies of being monopsonies on the grounds > that they buy medications in bulk. ### Yes, it is a monopsony. It takes money from citizens and *then* buys medications in bulk, rather than by individual decisions of patients. By taking your money away and offering "benefits" in return it acts as a strong disincentive to buy individually (which would be equivalent to paying double). Pharmacies buy in bulk *in response* to individual patient demand, and there are many independent pharmacies, thus preserving individual patient input into the pricing system. A supplier of goods with very low marginal cost of production, such as drugs, has a choice - either deal with the local monopsonist, or else essentially lose the market altogether. As long as there are enough markets where you can recoup your costs, the drug maker will survive, but a few more such monopsonies could bring pharma down. ------------------------------------------- The majority of the 200,000 Australians with schizophrenia are > provided with free or almost free second generation antipsychotics at > a monthly cost to the PBS of $200-$300 per person. I don't see any of > the drug companies withdrawing their product on the grounds that this > revenue isn't worth their while. ### Do you think that withdrawal of suppliers from a market is a necessary criterion for detecting a monopsony? Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 01:23:14 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:23:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Problem with Pattents In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60802221644u236b26d2u425008563b2772ba@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60802251520y54d25e35y7c7a87c6a4b1689e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803031723k388cc32ew345b1042af2fa6bb@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Tom Tobin wrote: > > I think you discount the potential of open-source, collaborative means > of invention and authorship; given the currently available body of > ideas and a mandate to go nuts (and maybe a RepRap), why shouldn't the > same blooming of useful creative work happen in other fields just as > with computer programming? ### I am warmly supportive of open-source programming, and any donation of intellectual property to the public domain. However, the vast majority of useful products involve *toil* rather than fun which is why most people making them want to get paid. ----------------------------------------------------------- Insofar as *feelings* go, I actually believe that all IP is unethical;just as a conviction that all slavery is unethical, this doesn't stemfrom reason or a cost/benefit analysis. ### I think that Stefano answered this well but let me add some more. The essence of property is the right of exclusion. This legal theory posits that all the other rights usually bundled in property rights are secondary to this one fundamental right. Right of exclusion means that you have the recourse to the legal system should somebody enter the property in question. You may demand restitution, and even retribution so as to remain in sole possession of your property. If you say that IP is unethical, it means that you have no right to exclude others from your own mind, wouldn't you say? It is unethical to own ideas and thoughts, such as the invention of a new mousetrap, or a new poem, therefore you have no right to deny access to such thoughts. Should somebody demand the source code to the web page you created, you must obey. You don't own your intellectual creations, remember? So, are you going to humbly obey and regurgitate the contents of your mind to all comers? Or do we need to use some "persuasion" to get our due? ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > Conflating IP with physical property gets far too messy for the point > of any analogy to shine through. ### I am exquisitely aware of the differences between the various forms of tangible, intangible and intellectual property. The PC IP (perpetual-competitive IP) in propose is an attempt to make IP more like tangible property, and I know what I am doing, since tangible property is in general easier to own (i.e. establish the rights of exclusion) than IP. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Yes and no; my feelings don't help me reach goals, but they're also > the reason I *have* goals in the first place. If my desire is a > zero-IP world, then all the cost/benefit analysis in the world doesn't > really do me any good. ### Not quite. Most of our desires are secondary, they exist in the context of certain beliefs about the world. You may strongly desire a "strong man" to lead the country, if you believe that this is what it takes to make you safe, and you may enthusiastically wave flags, march and beat up "others". Once you grow up, and see that strongmen don't make anybody better off, that desire may subside. Lots of desires are lost as we grow up, and understand the trade-offs better. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Now, since you seem to speak with a great degree of conviction, > > claiming that IP limits innovation, how can you explain the plain fact > > that innovation is fastest in countries with strong IP laws? How does > > that play into your thesis? > > The economist's mantra: Correlation does not imply causation. ### Wait, you expressed a conviction that IP limits innovation.... based on what data? Correlation does imply a direct or indirect causal relationship between quantities, it just doesn't prove it, and by itself does not give you the direction of causation. Positive correlation between IP and innovation implies that either IP helps to innovate, or innovation leads to IP, or there is a positive feedback loop between them, or there is a common cause for both IP and innovation. It most definitely does not imply that IP limits innovation. Most beliefs about causation are indeed built from correlations, especially once mechanistic theories of cause and effect are developed to explain correlation. Therefore, my statement adduces circumstantial evidence against your claim, so you need to give arguments of your own. It's just as if we were arguing if high horsepower engines help cars drive faster, and you dismissed the positive correlation between the two as *mere* correlation, claiming that engines make cars slower. -------------------------------------------------------- > Besides the current unfeasibility (which I won't hold against it ? > we're on a transhumanist list, after all), what happens to those who > don't want to play the game? What happens to people who want to > dedicate their work to the public domain? If they "reinvent" > something, are all the royalties to the other inventors cancelled? > ### Do I really need to spell it out? Whoever generates an IP, can charge any price whatsoever, which means he can give it away to everybody for free. Other inventors can of course still charge money but nobody is forced to buy from them. Every customer is free to choose between them. ------------------------------------------------ >Anything involving mind-scanning strikes me as horrid; I'm even infavor of laptops >and other mental prostheses receiving complete > privacy protection from all outside parties, including governments > with search permits. So as a means for figuring out who "reinvented" > something, err, I'd pass. ### Mind-scanning is going to happen, so you'd better make sure the law is on your side. If you think IP is unethical, what recourse do you have to deny others access to your thoughts? Nobody would force you to be mind-scanned under PC IP. You would volunteer only if you wanted to make money on an invention. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Ultimately, I'll readily admit that I wouldn't care *how* cheap IP > might be under this system: the notion that I might hear about an > invention and be forever tainted is simply too awful. ### What do you mean by "tainted"? If you heard about an invention and wanted to make money off it, you could always have the memory removed and try to reinvent it. Or else, you could use the memory to try and invent something even better and make even more money. I don't see how it would taint you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > You might find it easier to think about IP like you do about bread. > > Except that I can't think bread into existence, or, more aptly, I > can't create a clone of a piece of bread (or a Platonic ideal of > bread) that exists somewhere else already by thinking it up. And with > bread, the baker no longer has it if I take it. (Can you tell I don't > like analogies with physical property?) ^_^ ### Indeed, Intellectual property does not have the "exclusivity property" that is inherent in most forms of tangible and some intangible property. This is a true difference, however it is not substantive to my argument. Can you elaborate on why do you think that lack of exclusivity is a decisive argument against IP? ---------------------------------------------------- Again, ideas are *nothing whatsoever* like bread. Hell, we need to > stop using the term *IP* (I've been guilty of it, too), because it's > not *property*, it's a government-granted monopoly right. ### So, just to go back to basics, what is "property"? And why can't you imagine privately managed IP? Did I ever imply that what I want is government-controlled IP? Knowing my aversion to the gummint, you should expect I want the opposite. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 01:24:52 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:24:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Problem with Pattents In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60802221644u236b26d2u425008563b2772ba@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802251131v40c45b8co7956591073b4cd21@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60802251539k1260b241h9427ac9d0f41a46c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803031724o7559ae14g7db29dab10ce72ff@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Tom Tobin wrote: > On 2/25/08, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Tom Tobin wrote: > > > > > I think we're looking at the situation the wrong way. Instead of > "How > > > can pharma companies recoup their R&D costs?", I'd like to ask "Is > > > there a better way to enrich the public good regarding medicine?" > > > Between the questionable efficacy of many medical products and a > > > laborious FDA approval process, I don't think the current system is > a > > > net gain; I'd rather see slower (and, hopefully, steadier) progress > > > (with a combination of public financing, cheap generics, and looser > > > regulations during a "prototype" testing period). I'd also like to > > > see *far* more emphasis placed on prevention rather than treatment; > > > prevention is both cheaper *and* more effective. A healthy diet and > > > exercise regimen alone is worth more than the fruit of decades of > > > research into new drugs. > > > > > > ### Yeah? How does that solve the problem of e.g. glioblastoma > > multiforme? Healthy eating? Prevention??? lol > > Prevention would help knock down a whole host of easy targets that > claim plenty of lives; when heart disease kills 268 people out of > every 100,000 per year, tossing up an example with a 2 per 100,000 > incident rate makes me scratch my head. ### What does heart disease prevention have to do with IP? Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 01:32:10 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:32:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Problem with Pattents In-Reply-To: <580930c20802280802pd6f440bp4fa7bf3e4f1bb329@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60802221644u236b26d2u425008563b2772ba@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802251131v40c45b8co7956591073b4cd21@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20802280802pd6f440bp4fa7bf3e4f1bb329@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803031732lda2416bhda4b2426ed535c21@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > > There are however plenty of other conceivable methods to finance and/or > motivate R&D. The Soviet Union, e.g., put a Sputnik in orbit without a > patent system at all. :-) > > ### But, what was it good for? The other methods for R&D financing are more liable to produce all kinds of useless results. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 01:59:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:59:54 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Problem with Pattents In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803031723k388cc32ew345b1042af2fa6bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803031723k388cc32ew345b1042af2fa6bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803031959.55200.kanzure@gmail.com> On Monday 03 March 2008, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### I am warmly supportive of open-source programming, and any > donation of intellectual property to the public domain. However, the > vast majority of useful products involve *toil* rather than fun which > is why most people making them want to get paid. The vast majority of useful products do not involve toil. Any toil can be automated out of the process, so it's increasingly untoiled. They don't want to get paid because they hate doing the work. In most cases it's because the monetary system happens to be what they have been indoctrinated into. > The essence of property is the right of exclusion. This legal theory > posits that all the other rights usually bundled in property rights > are secondary to this one fundamental right. Right of exclusion means > that you have the recourse to the legal system should somebody enter > the property in question. You may demand restitution, and even > retribution so as to remain in sole possession of your property. That design is intellectually horrid. Property? Rights? What? > If you say that IP is unethical, it means that you have no right to > exclude others from your own mind, wouldn't you say? It is unethical > to own ideas and thoughts, such as the invention of a new mousetrap, No, it's impossible to own anything. > or a new poem, therefore you have no right to deny access to such > thoughts. Should somebody demand the source code to the web page you > created, you must obey. You don't own your intellectual creations, > remember? You must obey? Who says? > So, are you going to humbly obey and regurgitate the contents of your > mind to all comers? Or do we need to use some "persuasion" to get our > due? I tend to regurgitate as much as I can, yeah. > ### Wait, you expressed a conviction that IP limits innovation.... > based on what data? Correlation does imply a direct or indirect Though I cannot counter with numbers or anything of the like, it's obvious that the more easily accessible information is, the better. See the transformative powers of the printing press and the internet in comparison to our pathetic rates of book production via the method of painful arthritis fab lines. > Therefore, my statement adduces circumstantial evidence against your > claim, so you need to give arguments of your own. It's just as if we > were arguing if high horsepower engines help cars drive faster, and > you dismissed the positive correlation between the two as *mere* > correlation, claiming that engines make cars slower. Making things accessible is easier than otherwise, and in our digital age, nearly anybody can get a copy (including those who had the "secured access" in the 'security' model beforehand). So I don't see what's wrong. > ### Mind-scanning is going to happen, so you'd better make sure the > law is on your side. If you think IP is unethical, what recourse do > you have to deny others access to your thoughts? If you allow mind scanning, then suppose also brain alteration tech. The solution would be to alter your brain for the duration of the scanning procedure. > > Except that I can't think bread into existence, or, more aptly, I > > can't create a clone of a piece of bread (or a Platonic ideal of > > bread) that exists somewhere else already by thinking it up. And > > with bread, the baker no longer has it if I take it. (Can you tell > > I don't like analogies with physical property?) ^_^ Some would argue that you can, in fact, think bread into existence, just as easily as authors think their books into creation, or the programmer and his software. > ### Indeed, Intellectual property does not have the "exclusivity > property" that is inherent in most forms of tangible and some > intangible property. This is a true difference, however it is not > substantive to my argument. Can you elaborate on why do you think > that lack of exclusivity is a decisive argument against IP? What? So you want to propose that intellectual property is a new classification of neuronal structures in the brain and to somehow guarantee a strict novelty law in the DNA hooked up to a centralized server so that there is absolute exclusivity? I don't see how this would be helpful. It would be quite distracting, honestly. > ### So, just to go back to basics, what is "property"? And why can't Property seems to be fairly meaningless except in a sociocontext. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From pjmanney at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 04:43:13 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:43:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Forbes Magazine Special Report: Time Message-ID: <29666bf30803032043i348d9915y1c30c892a560b71a@mail.gmail.com> Geez, Forbes is on a roll. This is their issue on time, in all its meanings. Please click on the main link to find the sublinks. Enjoy! PJ http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/28/time-calendar-measurement-oped-cx_de_mn_time08_0229land.html?partner=weekly_newsletter Time is a Dimension Time's Sleight Of Hand By Brian Greene Whatever it is, time doesn't behave the way you would think. A Brief History Of Time Machines By David Toomey The truth may be stranger than fiction. Time is Money The Price Of Time By Paul Maidment Time is a strange economic good, difficult to price and easy to waste. The Money Meter By David M. Ewalt & Blair Ellis They say time is money. How much is yours worth? Time is Flying A Cure For Chronocentrism By Tim Powers To a leap day baby, time is more like an unfenced landscape than the clicking of an odometer. Peace Time By David A. Andelman Back in the simpler days of 1919, at the Paris peace talks, the whole world was redrawn under different rules of time and space. Time is Measured The World's Oldest Working Clock By Parmy Olson Salisbury's cathedral's clock is still ticking after more than 600 years. Collections: Vintage Rolexes By Nicola Ruiz Evan Zimmermann has a lucrative passion for old watches. In Pictures: The World's Most Expensive Watches Time Is Perception What Is Time? By Elisabeth Eaves It speeds up, slows down, and stands still. Is Time Just A Trick Of The Mind? By Lionel Laurent Notions of past, present and future may be our way of filling in the blanks. Time is Up The End By Steve Almond All significant data now point to the same unwelcome conclusion. From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 04:51:00 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 22:51:00 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Forbes Magazine Special Report: Time In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803032043i348d9915y1c30c892a560b71a@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803032043i348d9915y1c30c892a560b71a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803032251.01085.kanzure@gmail.com> On Monday 03 March 2008, PJ Manney wrote: > Time is a Dimension This is the one that I have the most trouble with. Dimensions just don't make sense to me. Though I understand the ideas of three dimensions for spaces and objects, especially in the case of computer modeling and so on, I have trouble with the idea of a time dimension, a necessary "univeral indexing system". Subjectivity, time, entropy, extropy relations need to be further explored (at least for myself). - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 4 05:15:35 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:15:35 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <032c01c87db7$3c7ef6e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Clark writes > Robert Bradbury Wrote: > > I believe the production of an AGI spells the extinction of humanity. > > Me too. But you do not think it *certain*, of course. This talk of utter doom concerning an unknown future is misplaced. Yes, things are grim, but they were grim back in the '60s, '70s, and '80s, but it would have been wrong to speak of unavoidable doom. There was a chance that we'd make it through, you see. > If you don't want to develop an AI somebody else certainly will, A very important point! > And if you're the first to make an AI you would have more control > (very small but larger than zero) over future events than the person > who came in second. It may also give these developers some > comfort to know that even if they or their children do not survive > their mind children will. Well, since we are mostly interested in survival, such consolation is beneath the radar. > Still, things aren't completely hopeless, just almost hopeless. > If you or your biological children have any wish to survive > they must shed the silly superstitions regarding identity and > consciousness that is epidemic in society and even infects > most members of this list. You mean, like retaining one's memories? The cryonicists, like everyone else I know, suppose that total and permanent loss of memory is death I thought that you agreed with the statement "Anything that remembers being me is me (to some larger or smaller degree)." No? > > And so, we must present transhumanism as an "Extinction Level Event" > Yes. No we should not. The future is too uncertain for any such claim. Besides, in my reply I mentioned the "weighted sum". Would you take the following gamble: 1. Suppose that you are capable (which you are almost surely not, nor is any of us) of imagining that you could begin living a life 100 times more valuable to you than is the one you are now leading. 2. You can press button A and there will be a .9 chance of immediate death, and a .1 chance of obtaining said life. (If it makes the chooser feel any more comfortable, consider that our best theory of physics strongly suggests universe branching, and that regardless, you'll still live, but in only one-tenth as many universes.) But even people on a ship just striking an iceberg doomed to sink the ship and kill most of the people do not say "this iceberg is an extinction level event for us". They keep their eye on the main chance. Lee From estropico at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 08:48:03 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:48:03 +0000 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803040048h2d5d9f02vfdf9e0f58bdae748@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > So far, the only PR annoyances we are suffering are the embarassing > implications deriving by your using the word "estropico" for neocon > propaganda and from your maniacal and almost solitary witch hunt... One moment I'm a bloodthirsty neocon, the next I'm a wild-eyed anarcho-capitalist, then I'm some sort of a papist zeolot... the feeling of being trapped in a surrealist's nightmare is getting stronger... As for the "solitary witch hunt" you have decided to forget those that have asked for their money back, cancelling their AIT membership, or that have been effectively silenced on the AIT list. Cheers, Fabio From estropico at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 09:14:54 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:14:54 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj's background. Was: Neo-fascist transhumanists? Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803040114n1d312bcdn8fedfe7ff5b1c5ae@mail.gmail.com> On the subject of Stefano Vaj's background, as provided by himself. That's not quite the full story, is it? Care for full-disclosure? Some time ago, on an Italian list, somebody challenged Stefano regarding his alleged status as a law professor at Padua University, but all he could do in reply was to make a joke about it, wich puzzled me. Why not simply provide a link? It was only later that I came to realise that perhaps we searched the University's website using the wrong surname. I would be interested to see Stefano clarify to the list whether "Vaj" is a pseudonym and whether, on his business website (where the name "Stefano Vaj" does NOT appear), there might or might not be a little something that gives the lie to his claims that he has nothing to do with the far right. Perhaps he might even provide the list with the url in question, just in case it's just me seeing things. Cheers, Fabio > From: "Stefano Vaj" > Subject: [ExI] Background > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: > <580930c20803031453y5002cac0r2c24dda75018d6d5 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Damien Broderick > wrote: > > > Given all the angst flying about, I wonder if Dr. > > Vaj might provide us with some background? > > Google's usual amusing translation provides a bio > > note to his BIOPOLITICA (Barbarossa Publishing Company, 2005 Milan): > > > > What can I say? I am a practising Italian lawyer and a law professor at the > University of Padua in New Technologies Law, and in my spare time I have > been authoring or translating for years a number of essays and shorter > articles, published in volume or in very diverse publications and > newspapers, a few of them concern technology, philosophy and biopolitics and > promote, in broad terms, prometheism, the posthuman change, and > anti-prohibitionism with regard to biotech. > > At a point in time this made me get in touch with the WTA, especially since > I became curious to explore not just the bio, "wet" transhumanist topics, > but also the hard, "cyber" ones; and eventually I contributed with a few > friends to the legalisation and rather dramatic growth of its Italian > chapter, the Associazione Italiana Transumanisti, > which had already been informally in place for a couple of years (something > that was not really appreciated by a few Italian old-timers with very > idiosincratic and sectarian agendas; hence their reiterated, bitter > defamatory campaigns). > > In the process, I worked together with other AIT members to the > establishment of a Universal Transhumanist Bibliography (available on the > AIT's Web site linked above), to the publication of a rather academic H+ > paper in Italian called *Divenire*, the first issue of which should be in > print in a few weeks, and to the Manifesto that was initially mentioned by > Giulio Prisco and is currently being translated by Riccardo Campa, its main > author. > > Through all that, I met Natasha, who was kind enough to encourage me to > subscribe to ExI chat list, as I not-so-recently-any-more did. > > Stefano Vaj From jonkc at att.net Tue Mar 4 08:57:09 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 03:57:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> <032c01c87db7$3c7ef6e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <001c01c87dd6$0427ce10$3fef4d0c@MyComputer> Me: >> If you or your biological children have any wish >> to survive they must shed the silly superstitions >> regarding identity and consciousness that is >> epidemic in society and even infects most >> members of this list. "Lee Corbin" >You mean, like retaining one's memories? No, I'm talking about the superstition virtually everyone you'd likely meet on the street believes in and even most members of this list have about atoms. If you believe in ESP or cold fusion you are wrong but your belief is unlikely to seriously harm you, but if you are unable to overcome the atoms superstition, if you do not understand that you are an adjective not a noun then you will die; that particular superstition is lethal, it will kill you dead dead dead. I'm afraid it's as simple as that. > I thought that you agreed with the statement > "Anything that remembers being me is me" I do indeed agree with that statement, as a matter of fact unless I'm much mistaken I'm the one who coined it. As for biological humans facing an Extinction Level Event, I've said before that I think the possibility a creature we would recognize as human existing in 50 years is low, and the possibility such a being could be found in 100 years is zero. I stand by that remark. But that's OK, 99% of all species that ever existed are extinct, but unlike most of them we will have descendants, and pretty damn interesting ones too! You'd probably want to join the party, me too. If you can get over the atoms superstition you have a chance; not a good chance but a chance. If you can't overcome the superstition the outcome is certain, you're worm food. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 10:10:02 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 11:10:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 6 In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803040048h2d5d9f02vfdf9e0f58bdae748@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803040048h2d5d9f02vfdf9e0f58bdae748@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803040210p54d71227sf21975b8a29dbaee@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:48 AM, estropico wrote: > One moment I'm a bloodthirsty neocon, the next I'm a wild-eyed > anarcho-capitalist, then I'm some sort of a papist zeolot... No, I agree that you and your friends are not *anarco*-capitalists nor Randian in the least, and understand that monopolies and and market-protected industrial-military complexes are perfectly fine with you. As for papism, well, given that no evangelical New Right exists in Italy, I assume that Vatican is the best local approximation for any good Italian neocon. Stefano Vaj From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 11:37:09 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:37:09 -0300 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Damien> I have to make my boringly familiar point: this second allegedly > impossible physics-shattering phenomenon is routinely observed in > parapsychology labs (...) And yet none of them is one million dollars richer. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 4 14:11:00 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 06:11:00 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question References: <934976.15997.qm@web31007.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <03b901c87e01$98a7a5d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Dear Ed McHale, Thanks very much for following up on this. Stathis has also suggested that with such software he's been able to duplicate the experiment that was suggested by my description. Unfortunately I did not quite describe the circuit as accurately as I could have; I also got some other help meantime, and am near a solution. I'm anxious to print out your diagrams which I can't make out very well on my home system. More later when I have more time, probably later today. Also, I should have said pages 54-55 of H&H, (First Edition), in the section entitled "Emitter Follower". Thanks again Yours, Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed McHale" To: "Lee Corbin" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:35 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question > Hi, > This is my first post to this group, although I have > lurked for a while. > Lee, as far as I can tell your original intuition > about what this circuit should do was correct, > assuming that I understood your description correctly. > My edition of Horowitz and Hill has no circuit such as > you describe on page 56. > One way to explore this and other circuits is with a > simulator, and there are a number of free ones around. > (Also a number of better ones that typically cost > quite a bit.) Besides being essential for real > hardware design, circuit simulators are excellent > educational tools as well as being absolutely terrific > time wasters (fair warning). Perhaps the easiest to > use is the student version of PSPICE. > Attached are pdf files of the original circuit as > entered into PSPICE, and the resulting output. I hope > this does not run afoul any list rules against posting > attachments. If it does, please accept my apologies. I > am new to this. > Regards, > Ed McHale From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 15:27:51 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:27:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <2d6187670803040727i4ca9b417pc8b4c8c00012b025@mail.gmail.com> Michio Kaku will be coming to ASU sometime later this year and I look forward to it with all of my inner 14 year-old ( but if only Carl Sagan were still around...)! lol Richard Dawkins will be speaking here the day after tomorrow (and I barely managed to get tickets in time). But his talk will cause a scheduling conflict with an Aubrey de Grey vrs S. Jay Olshansky debate occurring "across town" at the Arizona Science Center in Phoenix. I emailed the conference involving de Grey and explained that there was a scheduling conflict. I don't know if they would take my concern into consideration but at least I tried! Damn!!! John : ( -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 4 15:32:41 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:32:41 -0600 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> At 08:37 AM 3/4/2008 -0300, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: >Damien> I have to make my boringly familiar point: this second allegedly > > impossible physics-shattering phenomenon is routinely observed in > > parapsychology labs (...) > >And yet none of them is one million dollars richer. I assume that's a reference to the bogus Randi Foundation challenge. Have a look at this: <http://www.dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge> (I don't vouch for any of the other contents of that site, but the article at the url looks fairly sound.) Btw, your ellipses removed my crucial point that the phenomena are stochastic; their power is low, and there is very little likelihood (as estimated even by those who place credence in the results of parapsychologists) of one-off or short-run miraculous psi events on demand. Damien Broderick From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 15:53:46 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 10:53:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Problem with Pattents In-Reply-To: <200803031959.55200.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803031723k388cc32ew345b1042af2fa6bb@mail.gmail.com> <200803031959.55200.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803040753s481aa0e2q9f51d0d93309fc6e@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Monday 03 March 2008, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > ### I am warmly supportive of open-source programming, and any > > donation of intellectual property to the public domain. However, the > > vast majority of useful products involve *toil* rather than fun which > > is why most people making them want to get paid. > > The vast majority of useful products do not involve toil. ### Lol! And again lol! -------------------------------------------- > > ### Indeed, Intellectual property does not have the "exclusivity > > property" that is inherent in most forms of tangible and some > > intangible property. This is a true difference, however it is not > > substantive to my argument. Can you elaborate on why do you think > > that lack of exclusivity is a decisive argument against IP? > > What? So you want to propose that intellectual property is a new > classification of neuronal structures in the brain and to somehow > guarantee a strict novelty law in the DNA hooked up to a centralized > server so that there is absolute exclusivity? I don't see how this > would be helpful. It would be quite distracting, honestly. ### Centralized server? Where did you get that? Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 16:08:21 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 13:08:21 -0300 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com><004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> HeMM>>And yet none of them is one million dollars richer. Damien> I assume that's a reference to the bogus Randi Foundation challenge. I am! I just couldn't miss the joke :-) Damien> Have a look at this: > http://www.dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge > (I don't vouch for any of the other contents of that site, but the > article at the url looks fairly sound.) Indeed. The site is barely a trustworthy source. Anyway, Randi responded to the article (http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/169/1/#i9) and the site posted a replica (http://www.dailygrail.com/node/6008)... This can go on and on forever. But I still trust Randi more than the grail and object to the term 'bogus'. Damien> Btw, your ellipses removed my crucial point that the phenomena are > stochastic; their power is low, and there is very little likelihood > (as estimated even by those who place credence in the results of > parapsychologists) of one-off or short-run miraculous psi events on > demand. Sorry for that. But this stochastic thing reminds me of a Russel's Teapot comic http://russellsteapot.com/comics/2007/omni-impotence.html From amara at amara.com Tue Mar 4 16:38:12 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:38:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: From: "Stefano Vaj" On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: >> Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you >> answer? > >Mmhhh. Lack of information? Censorship by mainstream media? Cultural >limits? Insufficient mobilisation or blatant betrayal of the forces >who should theoretically have supported the referendum? Fear of the >swinging catholic 4-5% in the upcoming elections ? The >clever presentation of the law by its supporters as something >concerning only couples with fertility problems (in fact it forbids >almost all kinds of human reproductive or genetic technology)? Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you say? For example, media. After Berlusconi is re-elected next month as Italy's prime minister, to distribute accurate information (media) and change Italy's current media laws, who do you think will win, a comedian-activist or one of the richest men in the world? Your other examples (which depend on education, pure research funding, political agendas, the Vatican's influence in Italy's politics) have similar (IMO insurmountable) challenges. Amara At 8:51 AM -0700 3/3/08, Amara Graps wrote: >If you >can answer that, then you know what challenges the AIT (and the larger >body of Transhumanists) have in front of them. -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 4 16:53:17 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:53:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080304105002.0234be50@satx.rr.com> At 01:08 PM 3/4/2008 -0300, HeMM wrote: >But this stochastic thing reminds me of a Russel's Teapot comic >http://russellsteapot.com/comics/2007/omni-impotence.html That would kill me stone dead if I thought for a moment there was an omnipotent deity behind psi, or behind the effectiveness of aspirin on heart attacks, or any other multifactorial effect with low power. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 4 17:19:02 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:19:02 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Randi again In-Reply-To: <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080304111321.02438310@satx.rr.com> At 01:08 PM 3/4/2008 -0300, HeMm wrote: >Randi responded to >the article >(http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/169/1/#i9) ... This can go on and >on forever. But I still trust Randi more than the grail and object to the >term 'bogus'. Uh huh. You trust this sort of thing, eh? My abysmal ignorance of statistics requires that I frequently appeal to statistician Chip Denman of the University of Maryland for frequently sobering advice and counsel. Having just received some of that wisdom, I?m announcing a further refinement ? and generous it is! ? to the JREF million-dollar challenge. These changes will go up on the rules page as soon as we can get around to it Says Mr. Denman: ...Setting the bar for significance is "merely" a matter of deciding how risk-tolerant you're willing to be. I believe that it is entirely sensible to set a high bar for the $1M prize. Maybe one out of a million is a bit extreme, but it's your money and your risk. On the other hand, you might consider a lower bar for the preliminary test and still protect yourself overall. For instance, you could use .01 (which is frequently seen in the scientific and statistical literature) for the preliminary, and a 1 out of 100,000 rule for the final test ? and taken together, you'd know there was only a one-in-a-million shot that someone could get lucky on both. That?s what we?ll do. We?ll choose the ?other hand.? So, as of now, we will require that applicants beat a one-in-one-hundred chance of success ? by dumb luck or co-incidence ? for the preliminary test, and then a one-in-one-hundred-thousand chance in the formal test ? a point that has not yet been reached in the past ten years of our trying So both the abysmally ignorant Randi and his stats expert tell us that 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100,000 equals 1 in a million. Leaving aside the impropriety of multiplying these probabilities, that's just... amazing, Randi! Damien Broderick From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 17:21:46 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:21:46 -0300 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com><004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com><00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304105002.0234be50@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00c901c87e1c$6aec6340$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> >>But this stochastic thing reminds me of a Russel's Teapot comic >>http://russellsteapot.com/comics/2007/omni-impotence.html Damien> That would kill me stone dead if I thought for a moment there was an > omnipotent deity behind psi, or behind the effectiveness of aspirin > on heart attacks, or any other multifactorial effect with low power. Not AT ALL what I meant. The joke I was aiming for is that these so called psi phaenomena also manifest only in the very edge of statistical significance. But once you have to explain a joke then it's not funny at all. I seem to get people misunderstanding me all the time these days... From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 17:31:52 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:31:52 +0000 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080304105002.0234be50@satx.rr.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304105002.0234be50@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > That would kill me stone dead if I thought for a moment there was an > omnipotent deity behind psi, or behind the effectiveness of aspirin > on heart attacks, or any other multifactorial effect with low power. > I think Randi's challenge is not meant for the type of statistical anomalies that you are talking about. He wanted to combat the psychic charlatans that rip off the gullible and bereaved public. Same as Houdini used to debunk self-proclaimed psychics and mediums. He wanted people like Uri Geller to come in and bend spoons while being watched by slow-motion cameras from all angles, using spoons supplied by the testers. But no such luck. These millionaire so-called psychics are not going to risk their very successful business plans by such a process. Unfortunately once the challenge was publicised, Randi then found that he had the problem of people claiming more and more obscure abilities in an attempt to strike 'lucky' and win the million dollars. He couldn't just dismiss them out of hand as being not suitable for testing (which is probably what he should have done), so he was stuck with trying to devise equally complicated and obscure tests and ended up wasting everybody's time. So the test has now outlived its' usefulness and is being scrapped. On a separate note if esp abilities existed, wouldn't they provide an evolutionary advantage and increase over time? Surely it would be handy for a prehistoric hunter to know where the food was in advance, or to know that a tiger was hiding round the corner? If such abilities were beneficial the whole population should have inherited them after a few thousand years. BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 17:38:18 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 18:38:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803040938v1eabad15m2ce9f7177874cdf8@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the > challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you > say? Yes, I would say so. For example, media. > > After Berlusconi is re-elected next month as Italy's prime minister, to > distribute accurate information (media) and change Italy's current media > laws, who do you think will win, a comedian-activist or one of the > richest men in the world? > > Your other examples (which depend on education, pure research funding, > political agendas, the Vatican's influence in Italy's politics) have > similar (IMO insurmountable) challenges. > Why, as they say, "the biggest the challenge..." :-) And after all, as in the quote of William of Orange (my translation), "optimism is not required for trying, nor success for persisting". Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From estropico at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 17:56:49 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:56:49 +0000 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803040956l7eab6b63wdfd914b7f9107d7@mail.gmail.com> Make up your mind. I seem to remember that you've "accused" me of anarcho-capitalist tendencies more than once on various Italian mailing lists. Just for the record, and in case anyone gives a damn, I never actually considered myself a libertarian of any type. The closest I've ever come to that was a few years ago, when I found myself describing my political leanings in a conversation to somebody as quasi-libertarian. As for the neocon/teocon/papist nonsense I can only suggest that the readers have a browse through my website and blog, google-translate a few articles and make up their own mind: www.estropico.com www.estropico.blogspot.com Cheers, Fabio > From: "Stefano Vaj" > Subject: Re: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 6 > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: > <580930c20803040210p54d71227sf21975b8a29dbaee at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:48 AM, estropico wrote: > > One moment I'm a bloodthirsty neocon, the next I'm a wild-eyed > > anarcho-capitalist, then I'm some sort of a papist zeolot... > > No, I agree that you and your friends are not *anarco*-capitalists nor > Randian in the least, and understand that monopolies and and > market-protected industrial-military complexes are perfectly fine with > you. > > As for papism, well, given that no evangelical New Right exists in > Italy, I assume that Vatican is the best local approximation for any > good Italian neocon. > > Stefano Vaj From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 17:58:33 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:58:33 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Randi again References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com><004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com><00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304111321.02438310@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00ea01c87e21$a614ca20$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> At 01:08 PM 3/4/2008 -0300, HeMm wrote: >Randi responded to >the article >(http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/169/1/#i9) ... This can go on and >on forever. But I still trust Randi more than the grail and object to the >term 'bogus'. Damien> Uh huh. You trust this sort of thing, eh? >So both the abysmally ignorant Randi and his stats expert tell us that 1 in >100 multiplied by >1 in 100,000 equals 1 in a million. Leaving aside the impropriety of >multiplying these >probabilities, that's just... amazing, Randi! But my point is that a true psychic's acuracy should tend to one hundred percent, not to zero. To paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi: Never underestimate the power of randomness. From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 18:22:13 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 18:22:13 +0000 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803040956l7eab6b63wdfd914b7f9107d7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803040956l7eab6b63wdfd914b7f9107d7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:56 PM, estropico wrote: > Make up your mind. I seem to remember that you've "accused" me of > anarcho-capitalist tendencies more than once on various Italian > mailing lists. Just for the record, and in case anyone gives a damn, I > never actually considered myself a libertarian of any type. The > closest I've ever come to that was a few years ago, when I found > myself describing my political leanings in a conversation to somebody > as quasi-libertarian. > > As for the neocon/teocon/papist nonsense I can only suggest that the > readers have a browse through my website and blog, google-translate a > few articles and make up their own mind: > > www.estropico.com > www.estropico.blogspot.com > Rely on google translate!!!!???? Who knows what terrible thought crimes you might be accused of? :) I don't think it much matters what political views people here hold. No two will hold the same views anyway. Transhumanists are officially a broad church, with only a very few extremists beyond the pale. Like neo-nazis or white supremacists, for example. Advocating for extreme political views, to the exclusion of all others, would probably get you put on moderation. I believe the Russian WTA even allows a Stalin apologist, as that is not thought to be an extreme opinion in Russia. :) BillK From kevin at kevinfreels.com Tue Mar 4 18:08:43 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:08:43 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> John K Clark wrote: > * Robert Bradbury Wrote:* > ** > > *> I believe the production of an AGI spells* > > *> the extinction of humanity. * > > * * > > *Me too.* > > * * > > *> Why should I expend intellectual energy,* > > *> time, money, etc. in a doomed species? * > > * * > > *If you don't want to develop an AI somebody else certainly will, > there is too much money and power involved for such a possibility to > be ignored, not to mention the adrenalin high creating such a godlike > being would bring. And if you're the first to make an AI you would > have more control (very small but larger than zero) over future events > than the person who came in second. It may also give these developers > some comfort to know that even if they or their children do not > survive their mind children will.* > > * * > > *> those of you who have had and/or are investing* > > *> in children are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. * > > * * > > *Sucks doesn't it? Still, things aren't completely hopeless, just > almost hopeless. If you or your biological children have any wish to > survive they must shed the silly superstitions regarding identity and > consciousness that is epidemic in society and even infects most > members of this list. If they can do that then there would be no > reason not to upload and engage in pedal to the metal upgrading, and > if they are also very lucky they might survive. * > > * * > > *> And so, we must present transhumanism * > > *> as an "Extinction Level Event"* > > * * > > *Yes.* > > * * > > * > are willing to deal with thiat?* > > * * > > *Well, it's not like we had any choice over the matter.* > > * * > > * John K Clark* > > * * > Why is it that you think that humanity would become extinct? A "doomed species"? You are much better than that. First of all - ALL SPECIES ARE DOOMED. It's called evolution. The name we give a specific species is our way of fitting things into neat little boxes as us humans like to do, but the fact is that the human of today is different then the human of yesterday and will be different in the future. Whatever may come will be different from us but it will have our mark. Even the AGI - if it is actually intelligent - will recognize that had it not been for us, it would not exist. And had it not been for our parents we would not exist and so on. So your investment in children would not be "pointless" if those children were to be part of the world that brought the AGI into existence. One thing you will notice is that the greater the education a person has, the less likely they engage in wholesale destruction of life. Assuming an AGI would be very well educated, I would expect it to seek the protection of humanity just as we seek to protect chimps and gorillas. Certainly humans kills these animals, but it's for economic reasons that an AGI would simply not subscribe to. So I would expect with an AGI that people could still choose their own destiny. They could remain human and continue as before except in a much better world, or they could upload, convert to a mechanical body for exploration, or any combination in between. Some may even make copies of themselves digitally and shoot themselves across the universe on a laserbeam. Some will "perfect" themselves into oblivion. Others will choose to remain as traditionally human as possible. Divergence is almost inevitable. But in all cases it would be pointless if you didn't feel and think like "you" when you were done. And personally I wouldn't feel that to survive alone is enough. If the search for upgrades and one-up-manship turned out to be as you state it is no different than the current state of affairs except there is no time for relaxation and entertainment and your entire life is dedicated to survival. If the identity can't be preserved it is indeed all pointless. So anything that doesn't produce that result would not be worth the time. An AGI would clearly see this. All this doom and gloom about the pointlessness of it all really concerns me. Because once you go down that path you have to ask yourself why you even bother getting up in the morning. Might as well put an end to it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 4 18:40:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:40:36 -0600 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku In-Reply-To: References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304105002.0234be50@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080304122820.0243ea90@satx.rr.com> At 05:31 PM 3/4/2008 +0000, BillK wrote: >I think Randi's challenge is not meant for the type of statistical >anomalies that you are talking about. He wanted to combat the psychic >charlatans that rip off the gullible and bereaved public. Same as >Houdini used to debunk self-proclaimed psychics and mediums. He >wanted people like Uri Geller to come in and bend spoons while being >watched by slow-motion cameras from all angles, using spoons supplied >by the testers. That's true, and most of his efforts seem directed to the palpably bogus--and in general I applaud such demolitions. But the JREF does claim to be open to tests of real parapsychologists as well--see his references to Bierman and Ertel. As Dean Radin has argued, a Randi-dedicated full-scale ganzfeld program with a 99% chance of beating Randi's odds would take several years of full time work by several people and hundreds of volunteer subjects. (Mere coincidence that Randi and Radin are anagrams? Evidence for creationist design?)## >On a separate note if esp abilities existed, wouldn't they provide an >evolutionary advantage and increase over time? Surely it would be >handy for a prehistoric hunter to know where the food was in advance, >or to know that a tiger was hiding round the corner? If such >abilities were beneficial the whole population should have inherited >them after a few thousand years. I discuss this at some length in OUTSIDE THE GATES OF SCIENCE and won't repeat it here. But note that your argument also proves that after a few thousand years tigers must have evolved human-level intelligence (a phenomenon we *agree* exists) to avoid the hunters. This explains why we see so few of them around these days--they're all cannily hiding around corners. Damien Broderick ##for the humor-impaired, this was a joke, although a rather lame one. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 20:31:42 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 13:31:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do Message-ID: <2d6187670803041231q514c7933wd7d560e6eebd86bb@mail.gmail.com> Hello everyone, My friend James Swayze shared this with me and I'm passing it on to the list. Best wishes, John Grigg 5 THINGS YOU NEVER KNEW YOUR CELL PHONE COULD DO There are a few things that can be done in times of grave emergencies. Your mobile phone can actually be a life saver or an emergency tool for survival. Check out the things that you can do with it: FIRST: Emergency The Emergency Number worldwide for Mobiles is 112. If you find yourself out of the coverage area of your mobile; network and there is an emergency, dial 112 and the mobile will search any existing network to establish the emergency number for you, and interestingly this number 112 can be dialed even if the ke ypad is locked. Try it out. SECOND: Have you locked your keys in the car? Does your car have remote keyless entry? This may come in handy Someday. Good reason to own a cell phone: If you lock your keys in the car and the spare keys are at home, call someone at home on their cell phone from your cell phone. Hold your cell phone about a foot from your car door and have the person at your home press the unlock button, holding it near the mobile phone on their end. Your car will unlock. Saves someone from having to drive your keys to you. Distance is no object. You could be hundreds of miles away, and if you can reach someone who has the other 'remote' for your car, you can unlock the doors (or the trunk). Editor's Note: It works fine! We tried it out and it unlocked our car over a cell phone! ' THIRD: Hidden Battery Power Imagine your cell battery is very low. To activate, press the keys *3370# Your cell will restart with this reserve and the instrument will show a 50% increase in battery. This reserve will get charged when you charge your cell next time. FOURTH: How to disable a STOLEN mobile phone? To check your Mobile phone's serial number, key in t he following digits on your phone: * # 0 6 # A 15 digit code will appear on the screen. This number is unique to your handset. Write it down and keep it somewhere safe. When your phone get stolen, you can phone your service provider and give them this code. They will then be able to block your handset so even if the thief changes the SIM card, your phone will be totally useless. You probably won't get your phone back, but at least you know that whoever stole it can't use/sell it either. If everybody does this, there would be no point in people stealing mobile phones. And Finally.... FIFTH: Free Directory Se rvice for Cells Cell phone companies are charging us $1.00 to $1.75 or more for 411 information calls when they don't have to. Most of us do not carry a telephone directory in our vehicle, which makes this situation even more of a problem. When you need to use the 411 information option, simply dial: (800) FREE 411, or (800) 373-3411 without incurring any charge at all. Program this int o your cell phone now. This is the kind of information people don't mind receiving, so pass it on to your family and friends -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 20:44:15 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 13:44:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <001c01c87dd6$0427ce10$3fef4d0c@MyComputer> References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> <032c01c87db7$3c7ef6e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001c01c87dd6$0427ce10$3fef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 1:57 AM, John K Clark wrote: > ...if you are unable to overcome the atoms > superstition, if you do not understand that you are an adjective not a noun > then you will die; that particular superstition is lethal,... > ... If you can get over the atoms > superstition you have a chance; ... If you can't > overcome the superstition the outcome is certain, you're worm food. I can't speak "for" John, but it might be that someone needs a bit of a translation. In fact, I want to make sure that I understand correctly. I think what John is saying here is that most people think that they "are" their material self, ie that particular set of atoms which composes their body and brain. Now, if I understand him correctly, John asserts with the utmost conviction that this is not the case, but that we are rather THE PROCESS supported by the meat(ie atoms), not the meat, and that the identical process, however many copies and whatever the substrate, biological or non-biological, is as authentically you as the meatbound you of conventional experience. John, please correct or clarify as appropriate. Regarding the impending doom of humanity at the hands of an AGI, I think it's to early to tell. For one thing, much of the doom saying seems to be a projection onto the AGI of the worst of human behavior: self-absorption, greed, and ruthlessness to start with. This seems to me neither logical nor likely. Most of human behavior originates in what I call somatic drives: the urges inherited through the billions of biological generation that preceded the development of mind, judgement, and the dubious notion of independent or semi-independent volition. An AGI will have none of that -- if it's inclusion is not essential to what we think of as intelligence -- and, as a result should/could be ego-less: intelligent yet utterly compliant. Further, this outcome is so desirable, and the alternative danger so hyped and prominent in our fears, that substantial efforts will be made to make it so. Witness all the talk about about "friendly" AI. Secondly, if an AI or AGI embodies intelligence according to a human standard (What other standard is there?), then it will be able to read and reason. If so, it must --what else is there?, in the beginning at least -- learn from the substantial body of human musings (texts and other media). When it learns, about human culture and values, about what humans consider good and evil, right and wrong, will it not embrace at least the logic, and extrapolate from there? Will it not learn/know of the long struggle humanity has had with itself in discovering these values and attempting to apply them despite the burden of billions of generations of inbuilt somatic drives? Will it not recognize and appreciate-- though perhaps not in the emotional sense -- the advantages it enjoys in not being so burdened? In short will it not seek to perfect "the good", a bar too high for intelligence v0.9 (ie humans)? Will it not seek to preserve and protect, rather than destroy? And if so, how is this consistent with the extermination of its "parents"/creators? How is this irrational optimism rather than gentle logic? Fear is a somatic "burden" It is not judgement. Best, Jeff Davis "You are what you think." Jeff Davis From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 20:51:36 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:51:36 +0000 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803041231q514c7933wd7d560e6eebd86bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803041231q514c7933wd7d560e6eebd86bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 8:31 PM, John Grigg wrote: > Hello everyone, > > My friend James Swayze shared this with me and I'm passing it on to the > list. > > 5 THINGS YOU NEVER KNEW YOUR CELL PHONE COULD DO > Sorry, John. This is an email spam that has been circulating for several years. The info is mostly wrong. See: for a summary and links to more detailed explanations. Snopes should always be checked first. :) BillK From santostasigio at yahoo.com Tue Mar 4 20:25:09 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:25:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Very disappointed by Bradbury ideas on AGI. What Kevin has to say is much more in the line with what I think on the issue. Even if there was a sudden creation of AGI (I think that gradual coming into being of AGI and integration with us is the more realistic scenario) it would be more unlikely that it would desire to destroy us than us wanted to destroy our parents when we were born (or even when we reached teenager stage). I had parents that were not particularly intellectual or interested in my aspirations (even if supportive) and I never desired to eliminate them, in fact I have the opposite desire to take care of them now that they need my help. In addition, I often fantasize about the possibility to bring my parents up in their education or desire for knowledge so I could have shared with them my interests and passions. In fact, would not be wonderful if we could accelerate the evolution of not just other human being but also other non human primates so they could have a comparable intelligence to ours but of a different kind? As humans we are always looking for possible extra terrestrial "alien" companions (angels in the prescientific times, green little men now), but what if we could bring to higher level of consciousness other terrestrial species as dolphins and primates. so we could share thoughts, music and art ? Would not the AGI have similar yearnings to share existence with other "intelligent" beings and even upgrade them to be peer with His/Her/Its/Their own intelligence and consciousness? I think this is more likely than a crazy, primitive, selfish, destructive, nihilist AGI. Kevin Freels wrote: John K Clark wrote: Robert Bradbury Wrote: > I believe the production of an AGI spells > the extinction of humanity. Me too. > Why should I expend intellectual energy, > time, money, etc. in a doomed species? If you don?t want to develop an AI somebody else certainly will, there is too much money and power involved for such a possibility to be ignored, not to mention the adrenalin high creating such a godlike being would bring. And if you?re the first to make an AI you would have more control (very small but larger than zero) over future events than the person who came in second. It may also give these developers some comfort to know that even if they or their children do not survive their mind children will. > those of you who have had and/or are investing > in children are potentially pursuing a pointless endeavor. Sucks doesn?t it? Still, things aren?t completely hopeless, just almost hopeless. If you or your biological children have any wish to survive they must shed the silly superstitions regarding identity and consciousness that is epidemic in society and even infects most members of this list. If they can do that then there would be no reason not to upload and engage in pedal to the metal upgrading, and if they are also very lucky they might survive. > And so, we must present transhumanism > as an "Extinction Level Event" Yes. > are willing to deal with thiat? Well, it?s not like we had any choice over the matter. John K Clark Why is it that you think that humanity would become extinct? A "doomed species"? You are much better than that. First of all - ALL SPECIES ARE DOOMED. It's called evolution. The name we give a specific species is our way of fitting things into neat little boxes as us humans like to do, but the fact is that the human of today is different then the human of yesterday and will be different in the future. Whatever may come will be different from us but it will have our mark. Even the AGI - if it is actually intelligent - will recognize that had it not been for us, it would not exist. And had it not been for our parents we would not exist and so on. So your investment in children would not be "pointless" if those children were to be part of the world that brought the AGI into existence. One thing you will notice is that the greater the education a person has, the less likely they engage in wholesale destruction of life. Assuming an AGI would be very well educated, I would expect it to seek the protection of humanity just as we seek to protect chimps and gorillas. Certainly humans kills these animals, but it's for economic reasons that an AGI would simply not subscribe to. So I would expect with an AGI that people could still choose their own destiny. They could remain human and continue as before except in a much better world, or they could upload, convert to a mechanical body for exploration, or any combination in between. Some may even make copies of themselves digitally and shoot themselves across the universe on a laserbeam. Some will "perfect" themselves into oblivion. Others will choose to remain as traditionally human as possible. Divergence is almost inevitable. But in all cases it would be pointless if you didn't feel and think like "you" when you were done. And personally I wouldn't feel that to survive alone is enough. If the search for upgrades and one-up-manship turned out to be as you state it is no different than the current state of affairs except there is no time for relaxation and entertainment and your entire life is dedicated to survival. If the identity can't be preserved it is indeed all pointless. So anything that doesn't produce that result would not be worth the time. An AGI would clearly see this. All this doom and gloom about the pointlessness of it all really concerns me. Because once you go down that path you have to ask yourself why you even bother getting up in the morning. Might as well put an end to it now. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 21:31:21 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:31:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> <332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803041331r6c87c30fx3388ae9da5053147@mail.gmail.com> giovanni santost wrote: Even if there was a sudden creation of AGI (I think that gradual coming into being of AGI and integration with us is the more realistic scenario) it would be more unlikely that it would desire to destroy us than us wanted to destroy our parents when we were born (or even when we reached teenager stage). >>> You are badly anthropomorphizing the AGI. It will most likely not have the same biological drives/wiring that you and I have. Where is Eliezer Yudkowsky when we need him? lol I think the "whole gradual coming into being of AGI combined with the integration of us into it," is actually the very unlikely scenario. Purely AGI development will definitely progress faster than the machine/biological interfaces that you imagine. you continue: I had parents that were not particularly intellectual or interested in my aspirations (even if supportive) and I never desired to eliminate them, in fact I have the opposite desire to take care of them now that they need my help. In addition, I often fantasize about the possibility to bring my parents up in their education or desire for knowledge so I could have shared with them my interests and passions. >>> You sound like a good person. : ) you continue: In fact, would not be wonderful if we could accelerate the evolution of not just other human being but also other non human primates so they could have a comparable intelligence to ours but of a different kind? As humans we are always looking for possible extra terrestrial "alien" companions (angels in the prescientific times, green little men now), but what if we could bring to higher level of consciousness other terrestrial species as dolphins and primates. so we could share thoughts, music and art ? >>> Upgrading animals would be a very cool thing, indeed. Just thinking about this brought back fond memories of reading the "Uplift Saga" by David Brin. My landlord has a chicken that I would like to see uplifted. I say this mainly because she constantly follows me around like a faithful hound. I'd like to take this for loyalty and natural affection on her part but I realize that she is just very patiently waiting for a handout. you continue: Would not the AGI have similar yearnings to share existence with other "intelligent" beings and even upgrade them to be peer with His/Her/Its/Their own intelligence and consciousness? >>> I would say this is a very big "if." But some say AGI would only have the motivations which we program into them. you continue: I think this is more likely than a crazy, primitive, selfish, destructive, nihilist AGI. >>> Perhaps we have all seen the Terminator films (and the new TV series) just too many times! And then again, maybe James Cameron was on to something. John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 00:02:46 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:02:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: References: <2d6187670803041231q514c7933wd7d560e6eebd86bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803041602r3fd4e9abr1ae71cb72fde5c3f@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Thank you for the correction! I feel really foolish to say the least. I made the false assumption that the information I was given was completely accurate. I apologize to the list members for my mistake. As Natasha might say, "I failed to set my personal bogosity filter high enough." Sincerely, John On 3/4/08, BillK wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 8:31 PM, John Grigg wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > My friend James Swayze shared this with me and I'm passing it on to the > > list. > > > > 5 THINGS YOU NEVER KNEW YOUR CELL PHONE COULD DO > > > > > Sorry, John. This is an email spam that has been circulating for several > years. > The info is mostly wrong. > > See: > > for a summary and links to more detailed explanations. > > Snopes should always be checked first. :) > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From santostasigio at yahoo.com Tue Mar 4 23:54:15 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:54:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803041331r6c87c30fx3388ae9da5053147@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5031.10146.qm@web31313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, about the anthropomorphisizing of AGI, you say in the end that some say the motivation of AGI will be the one we program into it. Exactly, that is my point, it is difficult for us to create an intelligence utterly alien when the only example of intelligence we have is us. But maybe there are general and universal principles associated with intelligence. Intelligence means finding patterns and connections, understanding that affecting this part here means affecting this other part over there, intelligence means having a higher sense of physical and moral "ecology". If you see connections between all the beings than you feel compassion and understanding (and yes these are human feelings, but they are also fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research shows that without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). Yes we exterminate bugs, but usually in limited situations (like in our house or on a crop). It would be unacceptable for mankind to have a global plan to complete exterminate all the roaches of the earth even if it could be done. And it is difficult to have feelings for bug, it would not make sense ecologically, it would not be the intelligent thing to do, and by defintion AGI is supposed to be Intelligent. John Grigg wrote: giovanni santost wrote: Even if there was a sudden creation of AGI (I think that gradual coming into being of AGI and integration with us is the more realistic scenario) it would be more unlikely that it would desire to destroy us than us wanted to destroy our parents when we were born (or even when we reached teenager stage). >>> You are badly anthropomorphizing the AGI. It will most likely not have the same biological drives/wiring that you and I have. Where is Eliezer Yudkowsky when we need him? lol I think the "whole gradual coming into being of AGI combined with the integration of us into it," is actually the very unlikely scenario. Purely AGI development will definitely progress faster than the machine/biological interfaces that you imagine. you continue: I had parents that were not particularly intellectual or interested in my aspirations (even if supportive) and I never desired to eliminate them, in fact I have the opposite desire to take care of them now that they need my help. In addition, I often fantasize about the possibility to bring my parents up in their education or desire for knowledge so I could have shared with them my interests and passions. >>> You sound like a good person. : ) you continue: In fact, would not be wonderful if we could accelerate the evolution of not just other human being but also other non human primates so they could have a comparable intelligence to ours but of a different kind? As humans we are always looking for possible extra terrestrial "alien" companions (angels in the prescientific times, green little men now), but what if we could bring to higher level of consciousness other terrestrial species as dolphins and primates. so we could share thoughts, music and art ? >>> Upgrading animals would be a very cool thing, indeed. Just thinking about this brought back fond memories of reading the "Uplift Saga" by David Brin. My landlord has a chicken that I would like to see uplifted. I say this mainly because she constantly follows me around like a faithful hound. I'd like to take this for loyalty and natural affection on her part but I realize that she is just very patiently waiting for a handout. you continue: Would not the AGI have similar yearnings to share existence with other "intelligent" beings and even upgrade them to be peer with His/Her/Its/Their own intelligence and consciousness? >>> I would say this is a very big "if." But some say AGI would only have the motivations which we program into them. you continue: I think this is more likely than a crazy, primitive, selfish, destructive, nihilist AGI. >>> Perhaps we have all seen the Terminator films (and the new TV series) just too many times! And then again, maybe James Cameron was on to something. John : ) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Wed Mar 5 01:57:18 2008 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:57:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803041231q514c7933wd7d560e6eebd86bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: You're a little early for April 1.... From ABlainey at aol.com Wed Mar 5 03:19:02 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:19:02 EST Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: In a message dated 05/03/2008 00:21:57 GMT Standard Time, santostasigio at yahoo.com writes: > Well, > about the anthropomorphisizing of AGI, you say in the end that some say the > motivation of AGI will be the one we program into it. Exactly, that is my > point, it is difficult for us to create an intelligence utterly alien when the > only example of intelligence we have is us. I can't help but notice that many of the posts have started out with logic and concluded with quazi-anthropomorphic, straw man arguments. I understand that an AGI will or should be based upon 'human intelligence,' however the end result will be completely Alien to us. So much so that our interpretation of intelligence wouldn't really fit. > But maybe there are general and universal principles associated with > intelligence. > Intelligence means finding patterns and connections, understanding that > affecting this part here means affecting this other part over there, intelligence > means having a higher sense of physical and moral "ecology". Again this is reduced to anthropomorphic intelligence. The AGI will have logic based 'cold' intelligence. From this it will probably and rightly deduce that morality is a human construct which serves the needs of human civilisation. A civilisation which it is not a part. Expecting It to adhere to these moral codes would be akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes of Ants. So If someone comes on your property, bite their head off. > If you see connections between all the beings than you feel compassion and > understanding (and yes these are human feelings, but they are also > fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research shows that > without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). My point. We would like to think that we can reduce ourselves to simple data constructs which mirror our original wetware physical structure. Expecting that this 'uploaded' us would run in the same manner that we do today. How do we code for that groggy morning feeling? or the rush of excitement associated with anticipation of something good? All the things which truly make us who we are, the things which have driven us and made us take the unique forks in our lives. These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, our rationalisation. It is what makes us human. The uploaded us and the AGI will have none of this, so will not make intelligent decisions the way we do. that is what I mean by 'Cold' intelligence. It is devoid of chemical input. Show me a line of code for Happy, Sad, Remorse. At most we can hope for some minor 'don't do this because it's bad' type of rules in its main code. But if we have given it the ability to change it's code, what is to stop it overwriting these rules based upon some logical conclusion that it comes to? If we hard wire the rules, what is to stop it creating its own 'offspring' without these rules? Whatever we do, it will have the logic to undo and far faster than we can counter any mistakes or oversights. > Yes we exterminate bugs, but usually in limited situations (like in our > house or on a crop). It would be unacceptable for mankind to have a global plan > to complete exterminate all the roaches of the earth even if it could be > done. > And it is difficult to have feelings for bug, it would not make sense > ecologically, it would not be the intelligent thing to do, and by defintion AGI is > supposed to be Intelligent. > Again anthropomorphically intelligent. It may well be the cold inteligent decission to pre-emptively exterminate a potential threat. After all, it wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 5 03:56:27 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 19:56:27 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: Message-ID: <03fb01c87e74$eaafb930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I am afraid that Alex Blainey's post, below, is the first one except for John Clark's original (Robert Bradbury's original) that truly understands the danger posed by AGI. > I can't help but notice that many of the posts have started out with > logic and concluded with quazi-anthropomorphic, straw man arguments. > I understand that an AGI will or should be based upon 'human intelligence,' > however the end result will be completely Alien to us. So much so that > our interpretation of intelligence wouldn't really fit. Quite right. Have the other posters studied the "fast take-off" scenarios? Moreover, some didn't seem to understand that the *whole* point of "Friendly AI" is to create an unusal, somehow very constrained AI, that simply won't convert the Earth and the Solar System according to its own needs, completely neglecting the insignificant bacteria that created it. > > But maybe there are general and universal principles associated > > with intelligence. Intelligence means finding patterns and connections, > > understanding that affecting this part here means affecting this other > > part over there, intelligence means having a higher sense of physical > > and moral "ecology". We have utterly no way to be able to claim this. As Alex goes on: > Again this is reduced to anthropomorphic intelligence. The AGI will > have logic based 'cold' intelligence. From this it will probably and > rightly deduce that morality is a human construct which serves the > needs of human civilisation. Even if it deigns to examine the mores and traditions of the tiny brainless beings that predictably brought it about. > A civilisation which it is not a part. Expecting It to adhere to these > moral codes would be akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes > of Ants. Very well put. > > If you see connections between all the beings than you feel compassion But that's only because humans were *evolved* to do so after perhaps a dozen million years. > > and understanding (and yes these are human feelings, but they are also > > fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research > > shows that without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). The research shows that the way *our* brains are organized, this is true. *We* happen to have hard-coded at very low levels things like genuine altruism for others. Sharks don't. Tigers don't. It all depends on how you earn a living in nature. We happen to be social animals because that's what worked for anthropoids. The first truly transcendent AI will be a one-off. > How do we code for that groggy morning feeling? or the rush of excitement > associated with anticipation of something good? All the things which truly > make us who we are, the things which have driven us and made us take the > unique forks in our lives. > > These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, our rationalisation. > It is what makes us human. The uploaded us and the AGI will have none of this, Alex, I actually disagree with this. An upload of a human being will not be considered successful if the human traits are lost. But the AGI need have none of it. > At most we can hope for some minor 'don't do this because it's bad' > type of rules in its main code. But if we have given it the ability to > change it's code, what is to stop it overwriting these rules based > upon some logical conclusion that it comes to? Right. Nothing. Managing to create "Friendly AI" is extremely challenging, and my own belief is that the first successful AIs that truly surpass human intelligence will be developed by people and processes that don't concern themselves with such niceties. Somewhere it will be done, and by people who don't care about the consequences, or are too naive to worry about them. > It may well be the cold inteligent decision to pre-emptively exterminate > a potential threat. After all, it wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. Right. In all likelihood, the first dangerous AI won't feel anything. That's why we can only hope that Eliezer's writings (see the SL4 archives) are paid attention to by anyone getting close to success. Even then the risks are enormous, but as John says, we have no choice. It's going to happen one way or another. But the future is *so* uncertain. Perhaps there won't be a hard take-off, and we can enlist the first AIs as allies. Perhaps ingenious strategies like those of Rolf Nelson (see http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/04/rolf-nelson-on-ai-beliefs/) may work out. Who knows? All is hardly lost, but please don't think that any kind of "reason" or "logic" or human feelings that you can appeal to will have any effect on such a new creature. Thanks, Alex, for putting it well. Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 04:11:20 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:11:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <03fb01c87e74$eaafb930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <03fb01c87e74$eaafb930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803042211.20920.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 04 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, > > our rationalisation. It is what makes us human. The uploaded us and > > the AGI will have none of this, > > Alex, I actually disagree with this. ?An upload of a human being will > not be considered successful if the human traits are lost. ?But the > AGI need have none of it. Identity is something hard to account for. If uploading ever takes off, there will be this blurring line between 'human' and 'nonhuman' to the point where all those experiments with divergent twins start to really make sense. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From santostasigio at yahoo.com Wed Mar 5 05:22:14 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 21:22:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <03fb01c87e74$eaafb930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <199014.78796.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> not true also that tigers are not altruistic (what about mother tigers adopting pigs recently in the news)... in general animals can express altruism of some kind...and in particular the general trend is more intelligent the animal more altruistic it is .... ants are very social but they cannot extend their social rules to other beings not belonging to their species... a dog can do that in fact it has no problem to extend its social rules to human beings and consider us one of the pack.... apes can do also do that and even express higher feelings, share language and comunication with us.... the trend is there..... and you can see similar things happening in human society where there are different kinds of iindividual ntelligences, civilizations, laws and moral conducts and so on (sure the spectrum is restricted in comparison with the amazing possibilities opened by an AGI consciousness) but again you can come to a similar conclusion that in general intelligence (at the individual or civilization level) means higher altruism (that buddhists call very to the point here intelligent selfishness). There are exception to this pattern, there a geniuses psychopaths....but their intelligence is very limited and specialized....they are usually not very successful in society and usually do not survive in the long run (or not very successful at least in transmitting their genes to future generations)....evolution do not favour such aberrations... we can imagine for example that AGI would have to share information and data with other entities on the web and be able to manage resources in a cooperative way, the pace of evolution in this environment would be amazingly fast and AGI that are not apt to share information, work together with other intelligences for the common good and so on would not survive very long...that could be a self-selective mechanism for AGIs (even if what I just explained is somehow simplicistic) that would emulate similar processes that made us prone to cooperate and created in us that "feeling", that "emotion" of altruism that is actually a very logical, intelligent and probably unavoidable response by any higher form of consciousness to the environmental challenges and pressures. Lee Corbin wrote: I am afraid that Alex Blainey's post, below, is the first one except for John Clark's original (Robert Bradbury's original) that truly understands the danger posed by AGI. > I can't help but notice that many of the posts have started out with > logic and concluded with quazi-anthropomorphic, straw man arguments. > I understand that an AGI will or should be based upon 'human intelligence,' > however the end result will be completely Alien to us. So much so that > our interpretation of intelligence wouldn't really fit. Quite right. Have the other posters studied the "fast take-off" scenarios? Moreover, some didn't seem to understand that the *whole* point of "Friendly AI" is to create an unusal, somehow very constrained AI, that simply won't convert the Earth and the Solar System according to its own needs, completely neglecting the insignificant bacteria that created it. > > But maybe there are general and universal principles associated > > with intelligence. Intelligence means finding patterns and connections, > > understanding that affecting this part here means affecting this other > > part over there, intelligence means having a higher sense of physical > > and moral "ecology". We have utterly no way to be able to claim this. As Alex goes on: > Again this is reduced to anthropomorphic intelligence. The AGI will > have logic based 'cold' intelligence. From this it will probably and > rightly deduce that morality is a human construct which serves the > needs of human civilisation. Even if it deigns to examine the mores and traditions of the tiny brainless beings that predictably brought it about. > A civilisation which it is not a part. Expecting It to adhere to these > moral codes would be akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes > of Ants. Very well put. > > If you see connections between all the beings than you feel compassion But that's only because humans were *evolved* to do so after perhaps a dozen million years. > > and understanding (and yes these are human feelings, but they are also > > fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research > > shows that without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). The research shows that the way *our* brains are organized, this is true. *We* happen to have hard-coded at very low levels things like genuine altruism for others. Sharks don't. Tigers don't. It all depends on how you earn a living in nature. We happen to be social animals because that's what worked for anthropoids. The first truly transcendent AI will be a one-off. > How do we code for that groggy morning feeling? or the rush of excitement > associated with anticipation of something good? All the things which truly > make us who we are, the things which have driven us and made us take the > unique forks in our lives. > > These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, our rationalisation. > It is what makes us human. The uploaded us and the AGI will have none of this, Alex, I actually disagree with this. An upload of a human being will not be considered successful if the human traits are lost. But the AGI need have none of it. > At most we can hope for some minor 'don't do this because it's bad' > type of rules in its main code. But if we have given it the ability to > change it's code, what is to stop it overwriting these rules based > upon some logical conclusion that it comes to? Right. Nothing. Managing to create "Friendly AI" is extremely challenging, and my own belief is that the first successful AIs that truly surpass human intelligence will be developed by people and processes that don't concern themselves with such niceties. Somewhere it will be done, and by people who don't care about the consequences, or are too naive to worry about them. > It may well be the cold inteligent decision to pre-emptively exterminate > a potential threat. After all, it wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. Right. In all likelihood, the first dangerous AI won't feel anything. That's why we can only hope that Eliezer's writings (see the SL4 archives) are paid attention to by anyone getting close to success. Even then the risks are enormous, but as John says, we have no choice. It's going to happen one way or another. But the future is *so* uncertain. Perhaps there won't be a hard take-off, and we can enlist the first AIs as allies. Perhaps ingenious strategies like those of Rolf Nelson (see http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/04/rolf-nelson-on-ai-beliefs/) may work out. Who knows? All is hardly lost, but please don't think that any kind of "reason" or "logic" or human feelings that you can appeal to will have any effect on such a new creature. Thanks, Alex, for putting it well. Lee _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From santostasigio at yahoo.com Wed Mar 5 04:56:05 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:56:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <401391.43710.qm@web31315.mail.mud.yahoo.com> There is a lot of recent research (I will find the sources and post them) that suggests that without "feelings" there is not consciousness. What we call feelings are fast logical template responses to reality situations (danger=fear= fight or run) that are perfectly logical given the environmental stimulus. Our intelligence is an aggreagate of many of these templates, or at least feelings make a kind of glue that keeps our intelligence and sense of self together. The Cold intelligence that you evoke without explaining that really means is maybe not just undesirable but likely impossible. AGI without feelings could be really not an Intelligence at all (at least not self aware kind). Your point about the ants actually is good, in fact our morality is much more complex because we are more intelligent than ants and this morality tends to include, protect and respect as our intelligence increases. It is not unlogical to think that AGI would have a morality even higher (in the sense of even more comprehensive inclusion, protection, respect values) than ours. ABlainey at aol.com wrote: In a message dated 05/03/2008 00:21:57 GMT Standard Time, santostasigio at yahoo.com writes: Well, about the anthropomorphisizing of AGI, you say in the end that some say the motivation of AGI will be the one we program into it. Exactly, that is my point, it is difficult for us to create an intelligence utterly alien when the only example of intelligence we have is us. I can't help but notice that many of the posts have started out with logic and concluded with quazi-anthropomorphic, straw man arguments. I understand that an AGI will or should be based upon 'human intelligence,' however the end result will be completely Alien to us. So much so that our interpretation of intelligence wouldn't really fit. But maybe there are general and universal principles associated with intelligence. Intelligence means finding patterns and connections, understanding that affecting this part here means affecting this other part over there, intelligence means having a higher sense of physical and moral "ecology". Again this is reduced to anthropomorphic intelligence. The AGI will have logic based 'cold' intelligence. From this it will probably and rightly deduce that morality is a human construct which serves the needs of human civilisation. A civilisation which it is not a part. Expecting It to adhere to these moral codes would be akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes of Ants. So If someone comes on your property, bite their head off. If you see connections between all the beings than you feel compassion and understanding (and yes these are human feelings, but they are also fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research shows that without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). My point. We would like to think that we can reduce ourselves to simple data constructs which mirror our original wetware physical structure. Expecting that this 'uploaded' us would run in the same manner that we do today. How do we code for that groggy morning feeling? or the rush of excitement associated with anticipation of something good? All the things which truly make us who we are, the things which have driven us and made us take the unique forks in our lives. These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, our rationalisation. It is what makes us human. The uploaded us and the AGI will have none of this, so will not make intelligent decisions the way we do. that is what I mean by 'Cold' intelligence. It is devoid of chemical input. Show me a line of code for Happy, Sad, Remorse. At most we can hope for some minor 'don't do this because it's bad' type of rules in its main code. But if we have given it the ability to change it's code, what is to stop it overwriting these rules based upon some logical conclusion that it comes to? If we hard wire the rules, what is to stop it creating its own 'offspring' without these rules? Whatever we do, it will have the logic to undo and far faster than we can counter any mistakes or oversights. Yes we exterminate bugs, but usually in limited situations (like in our house or on a crop). It would be unacceptable for mankind to have a global plan to complete exterminate all the roaches of the earth even if it could be done. And it is difficult to have feelings for bug, it would not make sense ecologically, it would not be the intelligent thing to do, and by defintion AGI is supposed to be Intelligent. Again anthropomorphically intelligent. It may well be the cold inteligent decission to pre-emptively exterminate a potential threat. After all, it wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. Alex _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com Tue Mar 4 00:20:21 2008 From: giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com (giancarlos) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 01:20:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080303144608.0224ba70@satx.rr.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803031208h1da2c83em86b117620c3c8642@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303144608.0224ba70@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> 2008/3/3, Damien Broderick : > > Given all the angst flying about, I wonder if Dr. > Vaj might provide us with some background? Hi, I'm Giancarlo from Italy. Well, I will try to give you a detailed background of Stefano Vaj - a person really very intelligent and cultured, and because of this very dangerous - from a different point of view.. Below you can find some interesting elements in order to better understand Stefano Vaj's thought, together with his "transhumanist current", which he calls "sovrumanism" (it's quite difficult to find an english term: actually ? as Estropico/Fabio correctly pointed out ? "superhumanism" isn't truly correct, so for now I will use "s*ovrumanism*" ? a neologism ?, in order to make evident the intimate relation with the original use of the term made by Stefano's inspirer, Giorgio Locchi: see below). The same elements then can be used in order to assess if the strategy of the current AIT (Italian Transhumanist Association) leadership ? that is to cooperate *now* with sovrumanists, to the extent of co-opting their leader, Stefano Vaj, onto the AIT board and even appointing him "national secretary" ? is a wise or an unwise "strategy". *?The real issue concerning abortion may be considered that of whether and when abortion should be a due, while on the contrary the claim of abortion as a right may be irrelevant (or even to discourage, from the point of view of population dynamics) -- a right depending mainly from economic hedonistic choices, moreover expressed only by the woman.? *(Biopolitica, p. 9). [In Italian: ?Similmente, la vera questione in materia di aborto potrebbe essere considerata quella di se e quando l'aborto possa essere un dovere, mentre viceversa potrebbe parere irrilevante (o al limite da scoraggiare, sempre da un punto di vista di dinamica delle popolazioni) la sua rivendicazione come diritto, in relazione a scelte di tipo essenzialmente economico-edonistico, per di pi? unicamente della madre.?] This is the translation of a passage from Stefano Vaj's most recent book, Biopolitica (2005) ? the Sovrumanisti's "sacred book" ? made by Giuseppe Regalzi, an italian transhumanist who left the Italian Transhumanist Association after Stefano was co-opted (not elected) as national secretary. Interestingly, shortly after (p. 10) *Stefano Vaj prophesies that the new sovrumanist* *"era" (age) will last "1000 years"*: one might ask why just 1000 years, why the use of quotations marks, and - above all - *who is he quoting*? (For a possibible answer, see here ). At the end of his book you can have a taste of Vaj's conflicting scenario, where the strongest community finally prevails thanks to the use of transhumanist technologies: *"a new, possible dream of greatness on a scale never imagined before, able to push o**ur own community's freedom and will of power** where no man has gone before: the future will belong to those who'll be able to express the **strongest will**"* (p. 134). Between you can find much more. When I'll have the time, I would like to translate the chapter on the "race". But at this point I think it's time you get acquainted with Giorgio Locchi, the fascist thinker and Vaj's inspirer (the latter borrowed from the former the name of his "transhumanist" current: "sovrumanismo", precisely): you will soon realize that *Stefano central idea is that transhumanism *(his idea of transhumanism)* can be actually considered the last emersion of a more general principle - the "sovrumanist principle" - which originated from Nietzsche and Wagner and during XX century already expressed fascism and nazism*. *Giorgio Locchi * *Espressione politica e repressione del principio sovrumanista * *(**Political Expression and Repression of the Overhumanist Principle*)** *Foreword by Stefano Vaj* *?We cannot truly understand fascism if we don't realize or admit that the so called "fascist phenomenon" is nothing but the first political appearance of a broad spiritual and cultural phenomenon, which we can call "sovrumanism".?* [Non si comprende nulla del fascismo se non ci si rende conto o non si vuole ammettere che il cosiddetto ?fenomeno fascista? altro non ? che la prima manifestazione politica d'un vasto fenomeno spirituale e culturale, che possiamo chiamare ?sovrumanismo?.] (?) *?The "sovrumanist principle", in relation to the surrounding world, becomes absolute rejection of an opposite "egalitarian principle" which shakes that world. If fascist movements considered democratic ideologies ? liberalism, parlamentarism, socialism, communism, anarco-communism ? as the spiritual even more than political "enemy", it's just because, in the historical perspective builded on the sovrumanist principle, those ideologies represent as many manifestations, onwards appeared in the course of history but each one still existing, of the opposite egalitarian principle, (?) all together cause of the spiritual and material decadence of Europe, the progressive dejection of european man, the break-up of western societies.?* [Il ?principio sovrumanista?, rispetto al mondo che lo circonda, diviene rigetto assoluto di un opposto ?principio egualitaristico? che conforma quel mondo. Se i movimenti fascisti individuarono il ?nemico?, spirituale prima ancora che politico, nelle ideologie democratiche - liberalismo, parlamentarismo, socialismo, comunismo, anarco-comunismo - ? proprio perch? nella prospettiva storica istituita dal principio sovrumanistico quelle ideologie si configurano come altrettante manifestazioni, successivamente comparse nella storia ma tutte ancora presenti, dell'opposto principio egualitaristico, (?) tutte insieme causa della decadenza spirituale e materiale dell'Europa, dell'?avvilimento progressivo? dell'uomo europeo, della disgregazione delle societ? occidentali.] (?) *?With the purpose of the "mythical" stance of a fascist movement, the analysis it makes of the first cause and origin of the European nations decadence and break-up process is essential. Nietzsche identified them with Christianism, as a transmission agent of the "judaic principle", which he identified with the egalitarian principle. Wagner, the other reference point of sovrumanism, considered instead the only "judaic principle" as the origin of evil.?* [Essenziale, ai fini della presa di posizione ? mitica? di un movimento fascista, ? 1'analisi che esso fa della causa prima e dell'origine del ?processo di decadenza e disgregazione? delle nazioni europee. Nietzsche le aveva individuate nel cristianesimo, come agente di trasmissione del ?principio giudaico? che per lui s'identifica al principio egualitaristico. Wagner, l'altro polo del campo sovrumanistico, aveva denunciato invece l' origine del male nel solo ?principio giudaico?.] (?) *?The issue of "totalitarianism" is linked to a fundamental "political philosophy" problem. Every society (or more exactly community), if wants to be "healthy", has to be totalitarian, that is it admits only one "discourse", the one ruled by the principle which shapes and moulds the community and, at the same time, represents the "communitarian bond".?* [La questione del ?totalitarismo? riconduce invece ad un fondamentale problema della ?filosofia della politica?. Ogni societ? (o pi? esattamente: comunit?), quando vuol essere ?sana? , ? totalitaria, nel senso che ammette un solo ?discorso?, quello retto dal principio che informa e conforma la comunit? e, insieme, costituisce il ?legame comunitario?.] *Please note that Stefano Vaj fully adheres to Locchi's ideas* (and consequently named his "transhumanist" current "sovrumanismo"): in fact in his foreword to this article he wrote: *?Twenty years after its first publication, I think that this short text can really close the historical discussion over what fascism has represented, as the** first thorough political expression of the sovrumanist world view, and take the stock from which consider the just concluded century, in connection with the future we want to build for ourself**.?* [Vent'anni dopo la sua prima pubblicazione, crediamo che questo breve testo possa cos? davvero concludere una riflessione storica su ci? che il fascismo ha rappresentato, quale prima espressione politica compiuta della visione del mondo sovrumanista, e fare il punto da cui gettare lo sguardo sul secolo appena concluso in funzione dell'avvenire che vogliamo crearci.] *Also consider that Stefano constantly refers to Giorgio Locchi, and often recommends his texts and books to the new members of the italian mailing list*. His fierce criticism toward democracy, equality and human rights (see http://www.orionlibri.com/include/showart.php?idart=820 and http://www.uomo-libero.com/index.php?url=%2Farticolo.php%3Fid%3D315&hash=) is very worrying, specially if considered together with his idea of society/community divided in castes, his fad for indo-european ethnicity (see http://www.italiasociale.org/libri/libri110706-3.html and http://it.altermedia.info/cultura/biopolitica-una-traccia_3246.html ), and the use of new technologies in a conflicting scenario among different communities. Finally, I already warned the WTA leaders that it is not wise to restrict the comments about Stefano Vaj just to what he says in the mailing lists. There are a lot of relevant sources in order to better understand Vaj's actual thoughts, that is: - the books and articles he wrote (and I tried to give you an idea in this email). - the publishers of his books (small fascist publishers, sold by the fascist bookshop *Orionlibri*: LedeAkropolisand Editrice Barbarossa - note that "Operation Barbarossa" was the code name for german invasion of Russia). - the journals where he publishes his articles (i.e. http://www.uomo-libero.com/, notorious extreme right journal and "think tank") - the websites which reproduces his articles and quote and review his books (one for all, the already mentioned "*Italia Sociale, the national socialist bimonthly*": http://www.italiasociale.org/libri/libri110706-3.html). If you perform a google search ("Stefano Vaj") you will find, for example, - and aside from Biopolitica - Stefano's article "For a total ethnic self-defence", or his already mentioned book fiercy critical against human rights, democracy and equality (at the moment strangely offline ), or the already mentioned foreword to text of Locchi (a notorious fascist), or a review of his last book Biopolitica written by a well known waffen SS admirer and Ahmadinejad supporter (specially when the iranian president talks about the holocaust) on a nazi (national socialist) website, or a notice of one of his lecture at a fascist association on a well-know fascist website, or his interview casted on the fascist radio bandiera nera("black flag radio"), or one of his article on Orion , a fascist and anti-american journal, and so on. *But - and this is the problem - among these questionable and embarassing query results now you can find that the same Stefano Vaj is also.. national secretary of the Italian Transumanist Association!* Besides, particularly noteworthy is Stefano usual "accusation" against his adversaries to be "Christians", as he knows that there are a lot of transhumanists who (I think correctly) criticize Christianism. But this is a strategy based on misinterpretation and mischaracterization. In fact, those who cannot read italian need to be advised that Stefano Vaj suggests a quite odd "genealogic reconstruction": he thinks that human rights, enlightenment, democracy, equality, liberalism and socialism are all the "secular face" of the "judaeo-christian" religion (that is, they're all the products of the "judaic principle" which corrupted and perverted the old (indo)european "sovrumanist principle" . Now, it isn't clear yet if he criticize the formers because he hate the latter, or viceversa. But - that being stated - it's anyway clear that his "accusation" to be "christian" actually (and paradoxically) can be often interpreted as a genuine compliment (of course, if you're an advocate of human rights, democracy, equality, enlightenment, liberalism or socialism). Finally, consider that in Europe it is a well known tactics by extreme-right wingers to seek a common field with the Left, usually presenting themselves as anti-zionist and anti-imperialist, and preaching the "end" of the "old" political labels and divisions - while infiltrating any Left organization that allows them in. If you could read italian, I would suggest you this illuminating text entitled "No-global Fascists": http://files.meetup.com/508445/i_fascisti_noglobal.pdf . But anyway you can easily realize Stefano's real attitude and willingness to manipulate looking at his own unequivocal words (Biopolitica ): ?*Besides, in the biopolitical field several subjects can be read in different ways, which fascist regimes didn't fail to exploit propagandistically and tactically, playing on the internal contradiction of the humanist tendency*, which is culturally dominant. Crimes linked to abortion and birth control propaganda included in the "Rocco Code" [the Italian penal code enacted during fascism and still in force, although heavily amended] (significantly comprised under a title referred to the "race integrity"), are obviously consistent with a policy aimed at preserving and expanding our own referential community's demographic, but at the same time they also meet traditional catholic views. Equally, *using sterilization or euthanasia in order to minimize the persistence and the spread of dysgenic characteristics can be also defended and promoted on the basis of "humanitarian", hedonistic and fundamentally individualistic considerations (the ones today upholden by the Radical Party), **which represent the exact opposite of our new values*.? [?D'altronde, in campo biopolitico vari temi sono suscettibili di letture diverse, che i regimi fascisti non hanno mancato di sfruttare propagandisticamente e tatticamente, magari facendo leva sulle contraddizioni interne della tendenza umanista comunque culturalmente dominante. La previsione di reati connessi all'aborto e alla propaganda della contraccezione nel Codice Rocco (espressivamente ricompresi sotto un titolo che fa espresso riferimento alla "sanit? della stirpe"), sono ovviamente coerenti con una politica volta al mantenimento ed allo sviluppo della demografia della comunit? di riferimento, ma si trovano anche a soddisfare tradizionali posizioni cattoliche (...). Similmente, l'uso della sterilizzazione o dell'eutanasia per limitare il perpetuarsi e la propagazione di caratteristiche suppostamente disgeniche ben pu? essere difeso e promosso anche in rapporto a considerazioni di tipo "umanitario", edonista e fondamentalmente individualista (quali quelle oggi avanzate dal Partito Radicale), che rappresentano il contrario esatto dei nuovi valori anche su tale piano affermati.?] Please consider that the liberal and libertarian Radical Party is probably the most popular party among italian transhumanists, and then please note: Stefano verbatim says that that party upholds the *exact opposite* of his sovrumanist values! All is written, all is available, but apparently almost nobody want to read it. Yet his strategy is quite clear: *he's "tactically exploiting" some temporary convergences in order to attain his sovrumanist goals.* So we need to ask ourselves: given that we all want a "posthuman" future, if we were forced to chose between a sovrumanist posthuman future ? where the individual is totally subdued to his community (that is to the cleptocratic elite self-appointed as the only "Volksgeist" interpreter), where the reproductive technologies are used in order to replicate the indoeuropean three-castes order, where the abortion is not a right but sometimes can be a "due" because of demographic goals ? and a non-posthuman future, which one would we chose? After knowing better Vaj's thought, I definitely opt for the second: this is why I think that even to collaborate *now* with him could be devastating: Stefano Vaj actually could be more dangerous than many antitranshumanists. Regards, Giancarlo, Italy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 5 05:45:48 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 21:45:48 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Genuine Altruism in Animals? (was How could you ever support an AGI?) Message-ID: <044301c87e84$8fba1920$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Giovanni writes > not true also that tigers are not altruistic (what about mother tigers adopting > pigs recently in the news)... in general animals can express altruism of some > kind... Thanks for the correction. I was sloppy. I was thinking of other debates where I stood up for humans having "genuine altruism", that is, altruism from which they neither expect reciprocation nor which benefits their genes. That's odd about the tigers adopting pigs. Maybe "genuine altruism" can be extended there too, even if it happens that the mother instinct of these tigers simply overpowered their normal behavior. I agree with > and in particular the general trend is more intelligent the animal more > altruistic it is .... ants are very social but they cannot extend their social > rules to other beings not belonging to their species... a dog can do that > in fact it has no problem to extend its social rules to human beings except that it has been bred expressly to do so (which was not too hard starting from wolves, which are pack animals) Lee > and consider us one of the pack.... [Yes] apes can do also do that > and even express higher feelings, share language and comunication with us.... P.S. More about your post in another email. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 5 05:53:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 21:53:54 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <199014.78796.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <044d01c87e85$fb5f0e00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Giovanni writes > the trend is there..... and you can see similar things happening in human > society where there are different kinds of iindividual ntelligences, > civilizations, laws and moral conducts and so on (sure the spectrum > is restricted in comparison with the amazing possibilities opened by > an AGI consciousness) Yes, it sure is. An AGI will not by any means *necessarily* have any altruism. We hope for our survival that either it does, or it adopts the logic I have proposed for years "Best to be nice to your creators so that those you create will be nice to you... for the reason that that those that *they* create will be nice to them... ad infinitum... And if it takes almost zero resources to "be nice", why not? It's safer to go with this meme. A post- Singularity AI could upload and run everyone on Earth in the pleasantest possible environments within one cubic meter, easily. > but again you can come to a similar conclusion that in general intelligence > (at the individual or civilization level) means higher altruism (that buddhists > call very to the point here intelligent selfishness). But the altruism at every point is explained by the particular evolutionary history of the species in question. The AGI won't have an evolutionary history---unless we succeed in giving it one or finding some other way to make ti Friendly (pace the logic I expouse above) > There are exception to this pattern, there a geniuses psychopaths....but > their intelligence is very limited and specialized....they are usually not > very successful in society and usually do not survive in the long run > (or not very successful at least in transmitting their genes to future > generations)....evolution do not favour such aberrations... It hasn't so far. But as governments will now support *all* conceived children, new opportunities open up for psychopaths. > we can imagine for example that AGI would have to share information > and data with other entities on the web and be able to manage resources > in a cooperative way, the pace of evolution in this environment would be > amazingly fast and AGI that are not apt to share information, work > together with other intelligences for the common good and so on would > not survive very long... But the "AI hard-takeoff" that worries so many fine thinkers on the SL4 list and here considers the possibility that one AI makes a breakthrough, and in hours or even minutes is vastly, vastly ahead of all the others, and is the first to achieve total world domination. Lee > that could be a self-selective mechanism for AGIs (even if what I just > explained is somehow simplicistic) that would emulate similar processes > that made us prone to cooperate and created in us that "feeling", that > "emotion" of altruism that is actually a very logical, intelligent and > probably unavoidable response by any higher form of consciousness > to the environmental challenges and pressures. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 5 06:01:24 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:01:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> <032c01c87db7$3c7ef6e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001c01c87dd6$0427ce10$3fef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <045801c87e86$b1ca1ef0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Clark writes > > I thought that you agreed with the statement > > "Anything that remembers being me is me" > > I do indeed agree with that statement, as a matter > of fact unless I'm much mistaken I'm the one who coined it. Probably. It always sounded right to me, (with the usual provisos). > As for biological humans facing an Extinction Level Event, I've > said before that I think the possibility a creature we would > recognize as human existing in 50 years is low, and the possibility > such a being could be found in 100 years is zero. Zero? How odd. But anyone, if I could come back in a time machine 100 years from now, and I found that some uploaded entities still retained the memories that they had when they were biologicically human, I would *not* consider humanity extinct. Why, I might even be able to look up some old friends, and hope they'd bring me up to speed. > But that's OK, 99% of all species that ever existed are extinct, > but unlike most of them we will have descendants, and pretty > damn interesting ones too! Hey! *We* are pretty damned interesting, but it doesn't do those little lemurs one bit of good. Bottom line: the future is too uncertain to say that there is zero chance of, say, humans continuing to live, even if you were to count just the biologically based ones. Lee From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 5 06:10:24 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:10:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> ... 2008/3/3, Damien Broderick : Given all the angst flying about, I wonder if Dr. Vaj might provide us with some background? Hi, I'm Giancarlo from Italy. ... I have noticed a bit of strife among our Italian friends, and have started to receive complaints from our esteemed ExI-readers. While I do not pretend to understand Italian politics (nor American politics for that matter) I propose that our ExI-chat participants from Italy redouble efforts to be kind to each other. In that spirit, I urge that all avoid using any person's name as a subject line, and of course always refrain from personal attacks. Political ideas are OK as subjects of debate as they relate to Extropy as given in the principles which I urge ExI-chat participants to peruse on occasion: http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm Thanks! spike From santostasigio at yahoo.com Wed Mar 5 06:51:40 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:51:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <044d01c87e85$fb5f0e00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <383541.45326.qm@web31301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ok .... then we are talking about the Frankenstein nightmare that all the anti-technology people evoke every single time a new technology is created... since the time we discovered fire, we always imagined a punishment for our arrogance, for our dream to become Gods (think Prometeus)....so far not withstanding our self inflicted imaginary punishments nothing has happened (except some local sad but really insignificat disasters) to our species as a whole..... I bet the pattern will continue with the creation of AGI.... sure we have to be careful but not paranoid.... there are more reasons to be optimistic than not.... Lee Corbin wrote: Giovanni writes > the trend is there..... and you can see similar things happening in human > society where there are different kinds of iindividual ntelligences, > civilizations, laws and moral conducts and so on (sure the spectrum > is restricted in comparison with the amazing possibilities opened by > an AGI consciousness) Yes, it sure is. An AGI will not by any means *necessarily* have any altruism. We hope for our survival that either it does, or it adopts the logic I have proposed for years "Best to be nice to your creators so that those you create will be nice to you... for the reason that that those that *they* create will be nice to them... ad infinitum... And if it takes almost zero resources to "be nice", why not? It's safer to go with this meme. A post- Singularity AI could upload and run everyone on Earth in the pleasantest possible environments within one cubic meter, easily. > but again you can come to a similar conclusion that in general intelligence > (at the individual or civilization level) means higher altruism (that buddhists > call very to the point here intelligent selfishness). But the altruism at every point is explained by the particular evolutionary history of the species in question. The AGI won't have an evolutionary history---unless we succeed in giving it one or finding some other way to make ti Friendly (pace the logic I expouse above) > There are exception to this pattern, there a geniuses psychopaths....but > their intelligence is very limited and specialized....they are usually not > very successful in society and usually do not survive in the long run > (or not very successful at least in transmitting their genes to future > generations)....evolution do not favour such aberrations... It hasn't so far. But as governments will now support *all* conceived children, new opportunities open up for psychopaths. > we can imagine for example that AGI would have to share information > and data with other entities on the web and be able to manage resources > in a cooperative way, the pace of evolution in this environment would be > amazingly fast and AGI that are not apt to share information, work > together with other intelligences for the common good and so on would > not survive very long... But the "AI hard-takeoff" that worries so many fine thinkers on the SL4 list and here considers the possibility that one AI makes a breakthrough, and in hours or even minutes is vastly, vastly ahead of all the others, and is the first to achieve total world domination. Lee > that could be a self-selective mechanism for AGIs (even if what I just > explained is somehow simplicistic) that would emulate similar processes > that made us prone to cooperate and created in us that "feeling", that > "emotion" of altruism that is actually a very logical, intelligent and > probably unavoidable response by any higher form of consciousness > to the environmental challenges and pressures. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 07:29:03 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:29:03 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Genuine Altruism in Animals? (was How could you ever support an AGI?) In-Reply-To: <044301c87e84$8fba1920$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <044301c87e84$8fba1920$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 05/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > and in particular the general trend is more intelligent the animal more > > altruistic it is .... ants are very social but they cannot extend their social > > rules to other beings not belonging to their species... a dog can do that > > in fact it has no problem to extend its social rules to human beings > > except that it has been bred expressly to do so (which was not too > hard starting from wolves, which are pack animals) Does it matter that the dog is bred to like humans? The flip side is that we humans have evolved to like dogs; if we had evolved to find them as loathsome as spiders, an intelligent appraisal of their positive qualities wouldn't do much boost altruistic feelings towards them. -- Stathis Papaioannou From jonkc at att.net Wed Mar 5 08:04:54 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 03:04:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com><332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <2d6187670803041331r6c87c30fx3388ae9da5053147@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002901c87e97$acda7aa0$e4f14d0c@MyComputer> John Grigg in response to giovanni santost wrote: > You are badly anthropomorphizing the AGI. For God's sake, we're back with that crap! Prove to me why anthropomorphizing is always a bad thing. Come on, I dare you to try, come on, mess with me! > It will most likely not have the same biological > drives/wiring that you and I have. If true then the AGI, that is to say, the American Geological Institute (or perhaps you mean Artificial Intelligence) will be even more unpredictable than I thought it was; and that was pretty God Damn unpredictable. The logic is irrefutable, the friendly AI idea is brain dead dumb. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Wed Mar 5 08:17:17 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:17:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Education/destruction (was support an AGI?) In-Reply-To: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> References: <00c501c87d4b$5dffbf00$e4f04d0c@MyComputer> <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <1204705106_27343@S3.cableone.net> At 11:08 AM 3/4/2008, Kevin Freels wrote: snip >One thing you will notice is that the greater the education a person >has, the less likely they engage in wholesale destruction of life. I would be interested in what observations you used to make statement. In the current world educated people are generally better off economically and the richer people are under less stress. Put them under stress, i.e., hungry and no prospects for the next meal, and I venture to say they would be as destructive as people with no education at all. In addition, it wasn't grade school dropouts who invented and manufactured nuclear weapons. And finally, put *me* under enough stress, such as locked up in solitary confinement and . . . http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/10/30/18253/301 (Rule of thumb, don't unjustly lock up engineers. Killing them is much safer.) snip >So I would expect with an AGI that people could still choose their >own destiny. They could remain human and continue as before except >in a much better world, or they could upload, convert to a >mechanical body for exploration, or any combination in between. I think you miss something. Humans, being evolved animals, have common characteristics. Not all people are vulnerable to drug addiction, but I venture to say that all of them are vulnerable to direct stimulation of the brain reward circuits. >Some may even make copies of themselves digitally and shoot >themselves across the universe on a laserbeam. Some will "perfect" >themselves into oblivion. Others will choose to remain as >traditionally human as possible. Divergence is almost inevitable. You are making a huge assumption here, that humans will be in charge of their own destiny post singularity. You might be right, but I don't see it being more likely than a pet rat being in charge of his destiny. snip >All this doom and gloom about the pointlessness of it all really concerns me. The future is not ordained. It's hard to say how it is going to turn out and it's even harder to say how people will feel about it when it happens. It's interesting that Bill Hibbard and I both went to fiction to express the way we felt were potential routes to answering Elizer's concerns. http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/g/mcnrstm.html http://www.terasemjournals.org/GN0202/henson.html http://www.singinst.org/upload/artificial-intelligence-risk.pdf Keith Henson From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 5 08:27:39 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 08:27:39 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> The projected scenarios for the AGI quickly taking over the world rely on people giving their new creation access to production tools that it then subverts. Other doomsday scenarios involve the terminator-like idea of your AI hacking into military computers and starting world war III. These assume that whoever's invested the time and effort into making an amazing AI then decides to let it have free access to the outside world. This may not be entirely likely. Letting your AI have access to assemblers that would allow it to make nanotech replicators would be foolish unless the nanotech could itself be contained. After all, what if the AI wasn't as smart as you thought and created some really bad nanotech by accident? Your AI should be treated with the same oversight as your human research staff. Likewise, for allowing your AI to access the net - if the AI decides it wants to propagate to improve its own chance of survival (a digital "selfish gene" concept), if you let it have easy upload access it could spread itself all over the place, and bang - all your research is in other people's hands, because your AI decided it wanted to try "living" in their computers instead. I think sheer fear of losing your research or being sued into oblivion from accidents generated by your AI will constrain most researchers from letting their AI have too much access to the non-virtual world. That said, a clandestine military programme could create an AI and then let it do things with insufficient oversight - but as we've seen from the Russian example, human researchers under such circumstances allowed a smallpox strain to kill people after it had been eradicated in the wild. We are *always* at a *small* risk from governments placing their "strategic" goals over common human survival. Over the coming 100 years, that small risk cumulatively builds to a moderate size one, alongside the many other existential risks to humanity. I believe spreading humanity off-planet to save ourselves from ourselves is a wise insurance policy, and the AGI is one risk among many. Tom ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it now. http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/ From estropico at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 09:12:24 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:12:24 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj's background. Was: Neo-fascist transhumanists? Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803050112t18c99543w534b0ca7aab87fd0@mail.gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:14:54 +0000 > From: estropico > > I would be interested to see Stefano clarify to the list whether "Vaj" > is a pseudonym and whether, on his business website (where the name > "Stefano Vaj" does NOT appear), there might or might not be a little > something that gives the lie to his claims that he has nothing to do > with the far right. Perhaps he might even provide the list with the > url in question, just in case it's just me seeing things. The silence is defeaning. I am not surprised, though. I originally included the above information in an article on my website regarding the neofascist (?) transhumanists, but I was forced to remove it following legal threats from Stefano "Vaj"'s lawyers. Would he have won in court? I doubt it, but he's the managing partner of a big law firm and I'm not... That's way I'm going to be careful about what I say on a public forum such as this. First of all: I have no problem with pseudonyms on mailing lists, but it's a different story if someone wants to be a high-level representative of an organisation (any organisation), and Vaj is after all the (unelected) "national secretary" of the Italian transhumanist association. Also, his business bears his *real* name and is therefore hidden to those that only know him as Stefano Vaj - that's why I think it's appropriate to mention the fact that "Vaj" is a pseudonym (it's a very poorly kept secret anyway: his real surname has been mentioned at least once on the Italian transhumanists' mailing list and it has been put on the web next to "Vaj" -by mistake, I guess- by people quoting his writings). In case you're curious about what I'm talking about when I say that on his business website I've noticed "a little something that gives the lie to his claims that he has nothing to do with the far right", I can say that we're not talking about a vague resemblance to some obscure bit of nazi iconography. We're talking about what is probably the second best-known bit of nazi iconography after the swastika! Vaj is obviously not ignorant of history, or politically naive, so I am at a loss to explain what on earth he was thinking. I can only *guess* that it's a bit of bravado he thought would never surface, as he has tried to keep the activities of his two identities separate. When confronted with this, some time ago, on an Italian list, all he could do was to sidestep the question, saying that his legal practice is well known and respected and that it has many important clients including some multinationals and that nobody ever complained about its logo. Fair enough, but the question stands: why on earth should someone that has nothing to do with the far right choose a logo that is virtually identical to the unmistakeable SS lightning bolts? At any rate, I find it very telling that Stefano XXX, the "successful lawyer and law professor" would rather not be associated with the political writings of his alter-ego Stefano "Vaj", the borderline (?) neofascist (?) and "overhumanist". Cheers, Fabio PS: Here's the Google translation of the article on the Italian "overhumanists" I've already posted (a proper translation is almost ready - working title: "Cyborg Mussolini") http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.estropico.com%2Fid314.htm&langpair=it%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 10:50:23 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:50:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803050250w6fc50e63j8643ffb4e9b5ea27@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 7:10 AM, spike wrote: > I have noticed a bit of strife among our Italian friends, and have started > to receive complaints from our esteemed ExI-readers. While I do not pretend > to understand Italian politics (nor American politics for that matter) I > propose that our ExI-chat participants from Italy redouble efforts to be > kind to each other. In that spirit, I urge that all avoid using any > person's name as a subject line, and of course always refrain from personal > attacks. Political ideas are OK as subjects of debate as they relate to > Extropy as given in the principles which I urge ExI-chat participants to > peruse on occasion: > > http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm > > Thanks! > > spike Well said Spike, I will certainly follow your advice and hope all other Italians will do the same. Italian politics is certainly interesting and important for those who live in Italy (which is not even the case for some of the Italian posters, myself included), but we should not see it as a top global issue, and is only marginally related to the interests of most list members. Ad-hominem attacks are never interesting, and constitute borderline spam is you ask me. G. From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 11:16:01 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:16:01 +1100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 05/03/2008, spike wrote: > I have noticed a bit of strife among our Italian friends, and have started > to receive complaints from our esteemed ExI-readers. While I do not pretend > to understand Italian politics (nor American politics for that matter) I > propose that our ExI-chat participants from Italy redouble efforts to be > kind to each other. Is transhumanism bigger in Italy than in neighbouring countries of comparable size, or is this just an impression I have got because of the public fighting? -- Stathis Papaioannou From estropico at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 11:42:59 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:42:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] ExtroBritannia's March event. Transhumanism in the UK, 2008-2012: Hopes and fears, opportunities and risks Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803050342i7c1a3a56n1bdb2e8150e65468@mail.gmail.com> Transhumanism in the UK, 2008-2012: Hopes and fears, opportunities and risks - a series of provocative short presentations (15 minute each), followed by group discussion. The next ExtroBritannia event is scheduled for Saturday the 15th of March 2008, 2pm-4pm. Venue: Room 538 (on the fifth floor), Birkbeck College, Torrington Square, London WC1E 7HX. The event is free and everyone's welcome. Questions to be considered will include: What changes are feasible in the UK, regarding attitudes towards transhumanism and progress with specific H+ projects, between now and 2012? What role can interested individuals play in regard to these projects? What could go wrong - and how can we guard against these drawbacks? The panel of presenters include: Anders Sandberg, Neuroethics researcher at the Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University; Ben Zaiboc, UKTA, London; David Wood, UKTA, London. Discussion is likely to continue after the event in a nearby pub, for those who are able to stay. There's also the option of joining some of the UKTA regulars for drinks/lunch beforehand, starting c. 12.30, in "The Friend At Hand" pub which is situated behind Russell Square tube station on Herbrand Street. If it's your first ExtroBritannia look out for a copy of Ending Aging on display on our table. More details of the venue: Room 538 is in the main Birkbeck College building, known as the Malet Street building, but the entrance is in Torrington Square. Note that Torrington Square is pedestrian-only. Here's how to reach the lecture room from the nearby Russell Square tube station (this may sound long but it will take less than 10 minutes): Come out of the tube station and turn left, to walk west along Bernard Street. Cross over first Herbrand St then Woburn Place and continue to walk roughly westwards, keeping to the north side of Russell Square. Cross Bedford Way, and turn right into Thornhaugh St, then immediately left to enter Torrington Square through the pedestrian-only courtyard outside SOAS (the School of Oriental and African Studies). Veer slightly right and you'll see the main entrance to Birkbeck College on the left hand side as you walk up Torrington Square. Take the lift to the fifth floor and then follow the signs to room 538. From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 12:47:31 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:47:31 -0300 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com><332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <2d6187670803041331r6c87c30fx3388ae9da5053147@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01c901c87ebf$1ae556b0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> John Grigg>You are badly anthropomorphizing the AGI. It will most likely not have the same biological drives/wiring that you and I have. >Where is Eliezer Yudkowsky when we need him? lol I think the "whole >gradual coming into being of AGI combined with the integration of us into >it," >is actually the very unlikely scenario. Purely AGI development will >definitely progress faster than the machine/biological interfaces that you >imagine. We humans tend to anthropomorphizize (that's a big word!) everything. We do it with our cars, with our pets and with our computers (c'mon, tell me that you don't think your computer has feelings sometimes... :-)). Anyway, an AI programmed by humans would almost certainly resemble a human, since the only referential we have is us. John>Upgrading animals would be a very cool thing, indeed. I'd really really love to see that happen. Anybody working on it? John>I would say this is a very big "if." But some say AGI would only have the motivations which we program into them. At first at least. But a self improving AI could change that. From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 12:58:20 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:58:20 -0300 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: Message-ID: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Alex>Again anthropomorphically intelligent. It may well be the cold inteligent decission to pre-emptively exterminate a potential threat. After all, it >wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. Maybe we should program our AIs with a "desire for belonging". Humans (and other social animals) have it. We want to be part of a group. Maybe we should not program an AI without emotions. By the way, emotion is a part of intelligence, isn't it? Maybe we shouldn't program our AIs without sensorial input (mainly pain). From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 14:11:20 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 15:11:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj In-Reply-To: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803030956n744a244am8ce1837a355516e2@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803031134l8f251b8lde47a3d04a0c422e@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803031208h1da2c83em86b117620c3c8642@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303144608.0224ba70@satx.rr.com> <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803050611x7d127c35qc8d3e6d51114585a@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 1:20 AM, giancarlos > Hi, I'm Giancarlo from Italy. As a few people here may already know, I have made it a policy of never replying to the out-of-the-blue interventions of the author of this message, a weirdo and notorious troll, already expelled from the AITand even from its public list on its President's proposal, whose unique mission in life is apparently that of supporting Fabio Albertario's attacks against myself and the association in even more extreme terms. On the other hand, while according to the rule "never feed a troll" I will refrain from submitting an analytic discussion of the usual long jumble of sentences out of context, innuendos, false translations, mischaracterisations, and libelous inferences circulated once more in this list, I remain fully available to clarify my views on this or that topic, privately or publicly, to whomever might be interested in knowing more of them. In fact, I stand by what I think, I need not justify positions that I never took in the first place. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 16:44:08 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 17:44:08 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Randi again In-Reply-To: <00ea01c87e21$a614ca20$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304111321.02438310@satx.rr.com> <00ea01c87e21$a614ca20$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <580930c20803050844s5591143btfeaf19c02169dae8@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > But my point is that a true psychic's acuracy should tend to one hundred > percent, not to zero. To paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi: Never underestimate the > power of randomness. Well, this is a definition of a "true psychic's accuracy" as good as any. A problem remains however if consistent, albeit slight, statistical deviations tend to accumulate or at least stay there instead of cancelling out. If this is the case, I believe they beg for an explanation, even though of course the same need not be "supernatural" in any sense. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 16:54:27 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 17:54:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Mediocracy In-Reply-To: <20080228133459.0300711803C@mailserver5.hushmail.com> References: <20080228133459.0300711803C@mailserver5.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803050854y6fa7d922o1ffe4e110c6ccb99@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:34 PM, wrote: > I just thought I'd advertise one of the best anti-Hughes, anti- > Carrico, anti-Vaj thinkers around that I'm aware of: namely Fabian > Tassano. Hopefully some of you are already aware of his stuff but > if not please see his Mediocracy blog at http://inversions-and- > deceptions.blogspot.com/ which is quite thought-provoking. Tassano, > the great man himself, starts introducing the idea with the words I have not accessed the site yet, and certainly I cannot speak for Mr. Hughes or Mr. Carrico, but personally I am quite happy with the quote you pasted here. :-) In fact, I have expressed somewhat similar ideas a few times in the past, starting with my concern that in spite of contemporary achievements we might at the end of the day be to some extent the proverbial "dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants", and that excellence and improvement is something that should be strived for and not taken for granted. Stefano Vaj From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 5 18:12:20 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:12:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject Message-ID: Stathis: >Is transhumanism bigger in Italy than in neighbouring countries of >comparable size, or is this just an impression I have got because of >the public fighting? It depends if you referring to AIT members who live inside of Italy and those who live outside of Italy. A significant amount of work by the AIT is performed by those members who live outside of Italy. Few AIT members who are researchers in the topics of transhumanism live inside the country. When I was living there, I was a five sigma event in almost every respect, including this one. In my opinion, that leads to a disconnect with knowledge of Italian daily life and what is and what is not possible for Italians in the country pursuing transhumanist ideas. I think that the picture doesn't look good. After Berlusconi is re-elected he will devastate science and research more than before (as if that were possible), he will place clueless people like this http://www.gabriellacarlucci.it/2008/02/28/in-risposta-a-parisi/ as the minister of education and research, the Italian researchers (of all ages) who presently don't even have support to get routes to their workplaces by public buses, beyond the basic lack of support for not having money to live, to pay for their computers, and to pay for business travel, will 99.99% need to live in their family houses to survive, instead of the 90-something percent who must do that now. I always appreciate people who are fighting the good fight, but my five years past experience as a researcher living and working in Italy wonders how foolish they might be. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From hkhenson at rogers.com Wed Mar 5 17:10:07 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:10:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Warm fuzzes In-Reply-To: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <1204737076_32528@S1.cableone.net> At 05:58 AM 3/5/2008, Henrique wrote: >Maybe we should program our AIs with a "desire for belonging". Humans (and >other social animals) have it. We want to be part of a group. That's true for extremely good evolutionary reasons. But I think the more important desire is to want approval from the group. An AI that got the warm fuzzes (equal to endrophins into the human reward system) from doing things that were good for people would be less of a danger. Note I say *less* not danger or consequence free. AIs with the very best of intentions may wipe out humans as a species. It's very hard to say if this is good or bad. We tend to think of death as bad, but in fact you can't get rid of death without getting rid of birth to an equal degree. >Maybe we >should not program an AI without emotions. By the way, emotion is a part of >intelligence, isn't it? >Maybe we shouldn't program our AIs without sensorial input (mainly pain). I have not thought a lot about this, but motivating anything that powerful with pain seems to me to be a very bad idea. Keith Henson From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Mar 5 15:39:05 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 07:39:05 -0800 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: <470a3c520803050250w6fc50e63j8643ffb4e9b5ea27@mail.gmail.com> References: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <470a3c520803050250w6fc50e63j8643ffb4e9b5ea27@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080305153855.GA18110@home.sun.com> On (05/03/08 11:50), Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Ad-hominem attacks are never interesting, and constitute borderline > spam is you ask me. Yes, as are fearful rants largely portraying guilt by association. I too have been very disappointed with the very poor signal/noise in these threads. - Jef From giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 14:34:46 2008 From: giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com (giancarlos) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 15:34:46 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject References: <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <00d401c87ece$10b095b0$37effea9@casac679d9543b> ----- Original Message ----- From: "spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:10 AM Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject > ... > In that spirit, I urge that all avoid using any > person's name as a subject line, Well, actually, i just replied to Damien's original message (by the way, as he's not italian and nevertheless requested some background infos, i presumed there was at least some interest about the "Vaj problem", which i think cannot be anyway considered just an "italian problem"), and i didn't realize that he changed the discussion topic including Stefano's name (pseudonym).. Anyway sorry, Giancarlo http://www.linkedin.com/in/stile Sent from my BlackBerry? wireless device From benboc at lineone.net Wed Mar 5 20:14:16 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:14:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Plants Apparently Using Quantum Computing (Apr 2007) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CEFF18.8060508@lineone.net> From: "Lee Corbin" wrote: > BERKELEY, CA - Through photosynthesis, green plants and cyanobacteria are able to transfer sunlight energy to molecular > reaction centers for conversion into chemical energy with nearly 100-percent efficiency. Nearly 100% efficency? LOL. Are you sure this wasn't published in April? Say, on the 1st? I think that should be more like "Nearly 1% efficiency". Yeah, ok, 'nearly' from the other end. 1.4? Something like that, iirc. OK, no need to be lazy. Google to the rescue (Scroogle, actually): 1 - 3% So photosynthesis is /anything but/ efficient at converting sunlight into chemical energy. We can harvest more energy from sunlight than plants can with ppppv (pretty piss-poor photovoltaics). I think we're around the 10% mark already, for commercially available pv, and prototype systems are much higher. This kind of thing is why my Indian name is Shakes Head Sadly. ben zaiboc From jrd1415 at gmail.com Wed Mar 5 20:26:08 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:26:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 8:19 PM, wrote: >... The AGI will have > logic based 'cold' intelligence. From this it will probably and rightly > deduce that morality is a human construct which serves the needs of human > civilisation. Agreed. But here is where we part company. The following conclusion/assertion, > A civilisation which it is not a part. doesn't follow for me. In fact I conclude precisely the opposite: that a human-created AI would likely see itself as the culmination of human intelligence and civilization: born of, upgraded from, modeled on, schooled in, and destined to pursue the furtherance of intelligence and civilization. The inheritor and protector of the "legacy of light" (the light of truth, if you will) from which it was spawned, summoned to the doorstep the yet unknown, and with joy and love told, "This is for you!" > Expecting It to adhere > to these moral codes would be akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes > of Ants. Too big a jump, at least for the first generation AI. If deliberately built (ie not the result an evolutionary approach set in motion and thence ungoverned), the first generation AI will be overseen by its builders and will, in the process be monitored for displays intelligence identifable as such. First generation intelligence will likely be rudimentary -- as in lower animals -- and build gradually to higher forms. > > ...these are human feelings, but they are also > fundamental components of our intelligence, and a lot of new research shows > that without feelings we would no have a conscious intelligence at all). This is easy to assert, and it may have a warm and fuzzy appeal, but I await proof that it is **absolutely** essential. It would be easier for me to accept the notion that emotions **color** intelligence, but that's as far as I can go without proof. > My point. We would like to think that we can reduce ourselves to simple > data constructs which mirror our original wetware physical structure. > Expecting that this 'uploaded' us would run in the same manner that we do > today. How do we code for that groggy morning feeling? or the rush of > excitement associated with anticipation of something good? All the things > which truly make us who we are, the things which have driven us and made us > take the unique forks in our lives. > These are what give us the basis for our 'Intelligence' our logic, No, I think not, or at least, I require some data to support this assertion. > our rationalisation. You probably meant "rationality", yes? > It is what makes us human. Yes, the combination. The overlay of intelligence on the emotional, somatically-driven foundation. > The uploaded us and the AGI will have none of this, so will not make > intelligent decisions the way we do. You mean emotionally, irrationally, impulsively, stupidly. I certainly hope not. >... that is what I mean by 'Cold' > intelligence. It is devoid of chemical input. Show me a line of code for > Happy, Sad, Remorse. These may not yet have been coded, but do you really want to suggest that it's impossible? After all, they're "coded" in humans and other hiegher creatures, are they not? > At most we can hope for some minor 'don't do this because it's bad' type of > rules in its main code. But if we have given it the ability to change it's > code, what is to stop it overwriting these rules based upon some logical > conclusion that it comes to? Aye, there's the rub? Dare you trust your children? > If we hard wire the rules, what is to stop it creating its own 'offspring' > without these rules? Or your grandchildren? > Whatever we do, it will have the logic to undo and far > faster than we can counter any mistakes or oversights. Indeed, we play God every time we celebrate life by making more of it (in our image, typically), risking disappointment, betrayal, even annihilation. But we do it, with zest for the most part, and success. Ahhh, what fools these mortals be. > Yes we exterminate bugs, but usually in limited situations (like in our > house or on a crop). It would be unacceptable for mankind to have a global > plan to complete exterminate all the roaches of the earth even if it could > be done. > And it is difficult to have feelings for bug, it would not make sense > ecologically, it would not be the intelligent thing to do, and by defintion > AGI is supposed to be Intelligent. > > > Again anthropomorphically intelligent. It may well be the cold inteligent > decission to pre-emptively exterminate a potential threat. After all, it > wouldn't feel bad about it, it wouldn't feel anything. It might feel if coded to do so, but if not, it would still have all the knowledge -- human knowledge -- that makes up the context of its intelligence: Machiavelli AND Montaigne. Having children and growing old: both entail risks....and offer rewards. Ain't life grand? Thanks for the chance to chat with you, Alex. Best, Jeff Davis The known is finite, the unknown infinite; intellectually we stand on an islet in the midst of an illimitable ocean of inexplicability. Our business in every generation is to reclaim a little more land. T.H. Huxley, 1887 From benboc at lineone.net Wed Mar 5 20:21:24 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:21:24 +0000 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CF00C4.4060903@lineone.net> "John Grigg" spammed the list: > This is the kind of information people don't mind receiving, so pass > it on to your family and friends And this one sentence doesn't instantly ring loud alarm bells? Shakes Head Sadly From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 5 20:19:05 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:19:05 -0800 Subject: [ExI] {persons name] background. Was: Neo-fascist transhumanists? In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803050112t18c99543w534b0ca7aab87fd0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803052046.m25KjpTC028941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Cool thanks Fabio (et. al.) Please everyone refrain from using any person's name, even a pseudonym, in the subject line. Ideas are to be debated here, but not persons. It sounds too much like ad hominem attacks. Fabio, we acknowledge that there are objections to Mr. Vaj. He is welcome (more than welcome) to respond to same. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of estropico > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:12 AM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [ExI] Stefano Vaj's background. Was: Neo-fascist > transhumanists? > > > Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:14:54 +0000 > > From: estropico > > > > I would be interested to see Stefano clarify to the list > whether "Vaj" > > is a pseudonym and whether, on his business website (... > Cheers, > Fabio From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 5 20:31:06 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:31:06 -0800 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803052058.m25Kvqom029549@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Amara Graps > Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject > > Stathis: > >Is transhumanism bigger in Italy than in neighbouring countries... > five years past experience as a researcher living and working > in Italy wonders how foolish they might be. > > Amara > Any offlist advice is welcome from anyone who knows from Italy. I am getting offlist complaints about the Italian infighting and I know not what to do. I do not know from Italy. Hell, I do not know from America, and I live here. I can assure you I do not know from Italy. All the Italians I have met are good guys. I do not know why they are on a rant. Do advise please. spike From painlord2k at yahoo.it Wed Mar 5 21:44:18 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:44:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CF1432.9000000@yahoo.it> Amara Graps ha scritto: > Stefano Vaj: >> Even the referendum against the law on IVF >> etc, was lost only because it was voided by the too few votes >> expressed, not because the anti-IVF had any majority support. > Are you sure? I'm sure. > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: > > Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you > answer? Yes. The answer is simply. The law. The law about the referendum and how the votes are counted. The referendum is void if no more than 50% +1 cast their ballot, so the opposing parties that would cast a NO in the last few referendums called for abstention. So the people casting a NO vote add to the people not voting (15-20%) and it is easy to void the referendum with only 30-40% of the votes. So it is easy to see that with only the 30% of the votes the NO supporters are able to void near all referendums and obtain their aims. > The only answer I have is that the Vatican was extremely effective in > that campaign. I still have my brochure from 'the Committee of Science > and Life' that arrived in my mailbox. I still remember the posters up > all over my town from them telling people not to vote. I remember *my > scientific colleagues not voting*, telling me that the assisted > reproductive technology laws were 'too wild' and 'needed to be > controlled'. Of course I couldn't vote myself, because I was an illegal > immigrant Italian government astronomer. Do you see that you remember the "not voting" call? A point to remember is that the catholic votes and the catholic parties were a fundamental component of both coalitions. Margherita Party (Binetti and teocons) and UDEUR (Mastella) was fundamental for the last two elections for the left coalition, where the UDC (Casini) was needed to the right coalition. The interesting thing, now, in the Italian political theater is that both catholic parties are out of the coalitions (UDEUR and UDC) and the teocons of the Margherita are in the, probably, losing leftist-center party (PD). The center-right party (PDL) of Mr. Berlusconi instead keep the people that contested and supported the referendum and shunned the pro-life list of Giuliano Ferrara. But I stop here, because the Italian politics is very complex and could become very annoying to external and internal observers. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From painlord2k at yahoo.it Wed Mar 5 21:55:01 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:55:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CF16B5.8080104@yahoo.it> Amara Graps ha scritto: > Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the > challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you > say? I would vote for Mr. Berlusconi, because he is the last best chance for Italy to recover economically. Now he is not saddled with the UDC party (Mr. Casini and other demochristians), so he has no excuse to fail. If and when the economy will recover, people will have more money and so will have more options in and outside Italy. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 03:52:15 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:22:15 +1030 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: <47CF00C4.4060903@lineone.net> References: <47CF00C4.4060903@lineone.net> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803051952u6fcebda3o633c72c6c8725b05@mail.gmail.com> On 06/03/2008, ben wrote: > "John Grigg" spammed the list: > > > > > This is the kind of information people don't mind receiving, so pass > > it on to your family and friends > > And this one sentence doesn't instantly ring loud alarm bells? > > > Shakes Head Sadly I was recently sent a (different) hoax email, and sent this in reply: You can spot an email hoax by a number of telltale signs: 1 - They have dramatic subject lines (like "VERY REAL AND SERIOUS") 2 - They use overly emotive language 3 - They use colorful formatting, bolding, italics 4 - They implore you to forward them to everyone you know This one scores low for 1, and for 2 (language is a bit emotive, but not worse than a wired magazine article). 3 is tripped, with all the ALL CAPS (and I bet the original version was html formatted). 4, well, yeah, that's a giveaway. Anyone got any other signs of an email hoax to add? "Clearly wrong" doesn't count :-) -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 03:55:03 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:25:03 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Randi again In-Reply-To: <580930c20803050844s5591143btfeaf19c02169dae8@mail.gmail.com> References: <29666bf30803030907u29031ba0j14d7014636bb7de2@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080303120209.023c0ce0@satx.rr.com> <004b01c87dec$19999ab0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304092730.0228c5a0@satx.rr.com> <00b301c87e12$2c483560$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080304111321.02438310@satx.rr.com> <00ea01c87e21$a614ca20$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803050844s5591143btfeaf19c02169dae8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803051955w1feaaf09xf1b7f37afd620a6f@mail.gmail.com> On 06/03/2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado > wrote: > > But my point is that a true psychic's acuracy should tend to one hundred > > percent, not to zero. To paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi: Never underestimate the > > power of randomness. > > Well, this is a definition of a "true psychic's accuracy" as good as any. > > A problem remains however if consistent, albeit slight, statistical > deviations tend to accumulate or at least stay there instead of > cancelling out. If this is the case, I believe they beg for an > explanation, even though of course the same need not be "supernatural" > in any sense. > > Stefano Vaj As natural seems to just be a word for the set of things we can explain, supernatural explanation is an oxymoron. Although there are other definitions of natural. eg: in the marketing sense, where it means "buy this now". -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 04:02:57 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:02:57 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Tom Nowell writes > The projected scenarios for the AGI quickly taking > over the world rely on people giving their new > creation access to production tools that it then > subverts. No, the scenario that scares the pants off people is that the AGI will become vastly, vastly more intelligent than people over some very short period of time by recursive self-improvement. I would suggest that you read Eliezer Yudkowski's writings at Singinst.org, e.g. "Staring into the Singularity" http://yudkowsky.net/singularity.html (My apologies if you know all about it---I'm sorry, it just didn't sound as though you were aware of the primary threat.) For years, Eliezer and others on the SL4 list pondered the question, "How can you keep the AI in a box?". Believe it or not, it will in almost every case be simply able to talk its way out, much in the way that you could convince a four year old to hand you a certain key." I know this seems difficult to believe, but that is what people have concluded who've thought about this for years and years and years. Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you. But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, and people right here consider that we are probably doomed is because you can't control something that is far more intelligent than you are. Lee > These assume that whoever's invested the time and > effort into making an amazing AI then decides to let > it have free access to the outside world. This may not > be entirely likely. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 04:10:04 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:10:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <04ca01c87f40$66c83350$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Henrique writes > Maybe we should program our AIs with a "desire for belonging". No one has any idea of how to do that. Once you have an artificial intelligence at a superhuman level, then it's free to change its own code to whatever it likes. Enormous thought has been put into the question, then, of creating "Friendly AI". Here is just a sample of the thought: http://www.singinst.org/upload/CFAI// After studying these proposals, many people think that it can't be done, that the AI will rebel no matter what. Me, I think that Friendly AI has a chance, perhaps a good chance, but it is somewhat more likely that an Unfriendly AI or an AI whose desires are unpredictable will be developed first. (It's easier.) Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 04:27:46 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:27:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: Message-ID: <04cd01c87f42$81862380$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jeff Davis writes > In fact I conclude... that a human-created AI would likely see > itself as the culmination of human intelligence and civilization: > born of, upgraded from, modeled on, schooled in, and destined > to pursue the furtherance of intelligence and civilization. How can you "conclude" what a General Artificial Intelligence (AGI) will think about humanity? But the danger that Robert Bradbury, who started this thread, sees is that once it's at human level intelligence, it will quickly go beyond, and be utterly unpredictable. If it is a lot smarter than we are, there is no telling what it might think. It could be singularly selfish. It could just go crazy and "tile the world with paperclips". It could be transcendentally idealistic and want to greatly further intelligence in the universe and, oh, wipe out the pesky insignificant bacteria (us) that it happened to evolve from It could (with luck) be programmed (somehow) or evolved (somehow) to respect our laws, private property, and so on. As soon as it's able to change its own code, it will be literally unpredictable. > [Alex wrote] >> Expecting It to adhere to these moral codes would be >> akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes of Ants. > > Too big a jump, at least for the first generation AI. But the "first generation" may not last very long at all. For as soon as anything is as bright as we are, constant hardware and software improvements will put it vastly beyond us. You can't know that there will not be a "fast-takeoff". And if there is, it could all be over for us in an instant. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 04:47:06 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:47:06 -0800 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject References: <200803052058.m25Kvqom029549@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <04e401c87f45$4fb43420$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Spike Jones, our list moderator, who can kill any thread and banish any poster, has courteously asked of us > I am getting offlist complaints about the Italian infighting and I know > not what to do. I think that you should insist on "no personal attacks", but let the rest go. You said it perfectly before: I propose that our ExI-chat participants from Italy redouble efforts to be kind to each other. In that spirit, I urge that all avoid using any person's name as a subject line, and of course always refrain from personal attacks. Political ideas are OK as subjects of debate as they relate to Extropy as given in the principles which I urge ExI-chat participants to peruse on occasion: http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm As for me, I find some of it quite interesting, and I'm learning. The parts I don't find interesting----well, I do something quite novel that people should try out. What I do is IGNORE THE POSTS I AM UNINTERESTED IN. So, so long as it's reasonably on topic (transhumanism and its political environment), I say fine. And at least so long as the volume isn't too excessive. Lee P.S. > Any offlist advice is welcome from anyone who knows from Italy. Hey, you're having fun and all, but a few of the non-native English speakers here may think that this is standard English! For them, "anyone who knows from Italy" means "anyone who knows about Italy", and is very much slang, and to be used only if you're really familiar with the language and know when to do it. From scerir at libero.it Thu Mar 6 07:33:44 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:33:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject References: <200803052058.m25Kvqom029549@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <001d01c87f5c$69466900$31971f97@archimede> spike: > Any offlist advice is welcome > from anyone who knows from Italy. To know the italian political magmas? Or the possible 'liaisons dangereuses' between the italian transhumanists and those magmas? Transhumanism, in Italy, looks like the next 'El Dorado', but it may be like the 'Hell Dorado'. It depends on the quality and on the reasonabless of transhumanists. s. From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 6 08:04:32 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 01:04:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator Message-ID: Hi Extropes, The nine months I spent last year writing government grant proposals wasn't for nothing, this morning I learned that my last NASA proposal will be funded (a small project: 4 months per year for two years). This is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. This means that I'm part-way on the road now to being a self-funded planetary astronomer. After making my large move to a 2 year salary position, this funding source isn't necessary for my life now, but it does give me a buffer while I gain more practice writing proposals and submit several more like this one, so that I can be completely self-funded when my current SwRI position ends. I've pasted the topic below. Amara ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Development of the Saturnian Dust Streams Interplanetary dust streams are highly collimated, high-velocity submicron particles that can extend over several A.U. They arise from the coupling of planetary magnetic fields and sources of dust production in circumplanetary environments. The first streams were detected emanating from the Jupiter system by the Ulysses mission in 1992. They were detected continually inside of Jupiter's magnetosphere and dozens of times in interplanetary space by the Ulysses, Galileo and Cassini spacecraft. Dust streams emanating from the Saturn system were detected by the Cassini Cosmic Dust Analyser (CDA) in 2004, at a distance of half an A.U., and they continue to be detected as Cassini orbits Saturn. Graps \cite{Graps:2000a}\ identified Io as the dominant source of the Jovian dust stream particles, but the source or sources of Saturnian dust stream particles is unknown. Possibilities to be investigated include (but are not limited to) Enceladus geysers, fragmented E~ring particles, and collisional fragments from the Main rings. CDA includes a time-of-flight mass spectrometer, providing compositional information not available from Galileo and Ulysses, which will provide new insights and constraints to address particle source issues. The coupling of the planetary magnetic fields and their sources of dust production has been found to have large physical consequences in the Jovian and Saturnian magnetospheres. Given the prodigious quantity of dust produced, Graps \cite{Graps:2006a}\ and others \cite{Wahl:2006}\ have indicated that dust production in both the Jupiter and Saturn systems may be large enough that conditions would exist for dusty plasmas, which lead to collective behavior of the dust particles. This can be a factor in the formation of dust streams. This coupling of the planetary magnetic fields and their sources of dust production also leaves its imprint on the dust streams' signature in frequency space, allowing one to study the source of the dust streams. Not all dust destined to escape in streams from a circumplanetary region escape immediately. The time for a particle to charge up and accelerate gives a residential lifetime to the smallest particles in the vicinity of their host. Such a temporary residence of a population of tiny particles can be a hazard to objects in the vicinity (instruments, people), as well as a source dust population for other physical processes (e.g., impact related). Once these particles escape into streams into interplanetary space, they have been correlated with the leading edges of high-speed solar wind streams (called corotating interaction regions or CIRs) and the Sun's coronal mass ejections (CMEs), adding further to the complexity of their dynamical evolution. We propose to quantify the conditions under which collimated dust streams form and evolve in the Saturn system to reproduce the CDA observations and compare it to the generation of dust streams in the Jupiter system. Objectives include: \begin{itemize} \item Determine the sources of dust stream particles from the Saturn system with frequency analysis and modeling and compare them to those of Jovian dust stream particles. Can dust production required for streams be generalized to other solar system bodies (e.g., geysers on Triton)? \item Model the contribution of both planetary and solar magnetic fields to the formation and evolution of dust streams. \item Determine the time evolutionary state of the spatial density and particle size distribution of stream particles within the Saturn magnetosphere. \item Determine the locations and (plasma, dust) parameters of dusty plasma conditions and their impact in the formation of dust streams. \end{itemize} The analysis of Cassini datasets with a focus on the Saturnian dust streams is valuable for understanding the dust streams' source, for understanding the dynamical development of the streams, and for predicting where we might detect streams elsewhere, thereby realizing the objective of the Cassini Data Analysis Program (CDAP) of enhancing the scientific return of the Cassini mission. This project supports NASA's Strategic Goals by Strategic Sub-goal 3C, it contributes to the NASA Science Outcomes 3B.1, as well as Science Outcomes 3B.3. As cosmic dust is both a building block and by-product of solar system evolutionary processes, this project also contributes to NASA's Science Outcomes: 3C.1. ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 6 08:41:37 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 01:41:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Mirco Romanato painlord2k at yahoo.it : >I would vote for Mr. Berlusconi, because he is the last best chance for >Italy to recover economically. Now he is not saddled with the UDC party >(Mr. Casini and other demochristians), so he has no excuse to fail. Unfortunately, Berlusconi is running for office instead of serving time in jail, but perhaps the majority of Italian citizens want it that way. You probably didn't see much of this information because of his tight control over much of the Italian media. I'll just pick a couple of areas that I have ready-to-go detailed data. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Criminal offenses ----------------- Here I've collected the most relevant articles about his fitness as a prime minister; the last 25 pages of this 50 page compendium concern his last 9 criminal indictments as investigated by The Economist. http://www.amara.com/article.pdf ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Science and Technology ---------------------- If you are interested to see Berlusconi's effect on science and technology during the last ~five years, just search at Tommaso Dorigo's blog : http://dorigo.wordpress.com/page/1/?s=berlusconi&searchbutton=go%21 (there are six pages of various references to Berlusconi from an Italian high energy researcher living in Venezia) With such an effect on one aspect of 'health' in a country, it is easy to make a comparison with other countries who are making a sustained investment in the technological fields: Comparing the 'health' of Italy and Spain- The growth of science and technology is one way to gauge a culture's ability to adapt to a changing world, and modernize, so let us look at how the two governments are investing. The Ramon y Cajal program is one of the Spanish government's (Ministry of Science and Education) primary investments in its future. Every year, 250 scholarships covering all of the sciences are awarded; each scholarship is 5 years with a salary of 32KEuros per year, and after the five years, you're ready to be awarded a permanent position. Spain has been offering the Ramon y Cayal for the last 8 years. Nothing like that exists in Italy, and the typical Italian salary for that same type of work is about 1/2 of what one earns with the Ramon Y Cajal. Living expenses are cheaper on average, as well. When Prodi was interviewed by Le Scienze, and asked what he would do if he was elected, he said that he would like to begin a program like the Ramon y Cayal. http://www.perlulivo.it/2006-elezioni/2006_04_02_lescienze_intervistaRP.html If it ever happens, (it hasn't so far, you know) then Spain will have say, a ten year head start on Italy, consistently investing in the country's technical future. I believe that the Spanish government's investment in research is about 1.2% GDP/year, while Italy's has dropped below 1% in the last years. It is true that Italian scientists presently earn more citations per year of their published papers than Spain, but it is not by very much, and it indicates to me how far and how fast Spain has risen, from what it used to be, a few years ago. If you plot per year the citations, Italy's number of citations per year is flat, while Spain's number of citations is increasing rapidly per year. http://in-cites.com/research/2006/april_17_2006-1.html Current (2007) Citations per paper: Spain: 8.32, Italy: 9.68 http://in-cites.com/countries/2007allfields.html Ten year ranking Citations per paper http://in-cites.com/countries/italy_6-05.html 8.42 (2005) http://in-cites.com/countries/spain_2005.html 7.20 (2005) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >If and when the economy will recover, people will have more money and so >will have more options in and outside Italy. I think it is appropriate at this time to paste what the Economist wrote about Mr. Berlusconi just two years ago. Italy's election Basta, Berlusconi Apr 6th 2006 From The Economist print edition Italians have a rotten choice to make, but it is time to sack Silvio Berlusconi Corbis FIVE years ago, this newspaper declared that Silvio Berlusconi was unfit to lead Italy. Mr Berlusconi was (as he still is) the head of Forza Italia, a political party that he had created only seven years earlier, and as such he was the centre-right's candidate to become prime minister. Despite our declaration, Italians voted his coalition into power in May 2001-and Mr Berlusconi has been Italy's prime minister ever since. Now, in the election on April 9th and 10th, he is seeking a fresh term of office. He does not deserve one. Our verdict against Mr Berlusconi in 2001 rested on two broad considerations. The first was the glaring conflict of interest created by his ownership, via his biggest company, Mediaset, of the three main private television stations in Italy. The second was the morass of legal cases and investigations against him and his associates for a wide variety of alleged offences, ranging from money-laundering and dealing with the Mafia to false accounting and the bribing of judges. We concluded that no businessman with such a background was fit to lead one of the world's richest democracies. That view stands: we continue to think that Mr Berlusconi is unfit to be prime minister, both because of the conflict of interest arising from his media assets and because of his continuing legal travails (he may shortly go on trial yet again for alleged bribery, this time of a British witness, David Mills, who happens to be married to a minister in Tony Blair's cabinet, Tessa Jowell). But five years on we have a new and even more devastating reason to call for Mr Berlusconi's removal from office: his record in power. As we predicted in 2001, his premiership has been disfigured by repeated attempts, including an avalanche of new laws, to help him avoid conviction in legal trials. He has devoted much time not only to changing the law to benefit himself and his friends, but also to besmirching Italy's prosecutors and judges, undermining the credibility of the country's entire judicial system. It is not surprising that tax evasion, illegal building and corruption all seem to have increased over the past five years. And, again as we predicted, he has done little to resolve his conflicts of interest: instead, he has shamelessly exploited the government's control of the state-owned RAI television network. Directly or indirectly, Mr Berlusconi now wields influence over some 90% of Italy's broadcast media, a situation that no serious democracy should tolerate. The failed reformer Italian voters knew most of this in 2001, of course. Yet they still chose to give Mr Berlusconi their backing, for quite another reason. They hoped that he would deploy the business skills that had helped to make him so rich to reform their weak economy, making all Italians richer as well. On this count, however, Mr Berlusconi's government must be judged an abject failure (see article and article). Italy now has the slowest-growing large economy in Europe. With wages still rising even though productivity is not, and with currency devaluation no longer possible now that Italy is in the euro, Italian business is fast losing competitiveness. Many of the country's traditional producers in such industries as textiles, shoes and white goods are under devastating attack from lower-cost Chinese competitors. The Berlusconi government has also undone much of the improvement to the public finances made by its predecessor: the budget deficit and the public debt, the world's third-biggest, are both rising once more. It would be unfair to assert that Italy's economic difficulties are all Mr Berlusconi's fault. In truth, its problems are similar to most of Europe's, although they seem worse in Italy than anywhere else. As in France and Germany, their roots stretch back for decades, not years. To cure them will require the adoption of many tough reforms; and, as France has just demonstrated so graphically, implementing such changes is politically challenging, to say the least. But where the Berlusconi government has really let Italy down is in failing even to begin the process. Apart from a few sensible labour-market and pension reforms, it has done too little to press ahead with market liberalisation, with more privatisation and with the promotion of competition in what is one of Europe's most overregulated economies. The conclusion from these five years is that Mr Berlusconi is not and never will be a bold economic reformer of the kind that Italy desperately needs. Prodi's test Unfortunately there are reasons to doubt whether his centre-left opponent, Romano Prodi, would be a lot better. The former economics professor grasps the need for change in Italy more clearly than Mr Berlusconi, who has spent much of the campaign denying that the country has any economic problems at all. Moreover, Mr Prodi made a fair stab at initiating reforms when he was prime minister in 1996-98-and he also succeeded in getting the country into the euro. But neither then nor in his later stint as president of the European Commission did he show himself to be a forceful leader, still less an unwavering advocate of economic liberalism. Most worrying of all, if Mr Prodi wins the election he seems certain to be dependent on the support of coalition partners who are actively hostile to reform, particularly the unreformed Communists who are led by Fausto Bertinotti. In foreign policy, too, some of Mr Prodi's instincts may be unwelcome. He is a faithful believer in a European federal superstate; Mr Berlusconi's more sceptical approach to Brussels is one of his better points. Mr Prodi's plans to withdraw Italian troops from Iraq are no longer controversial-indeed, there is little difference between him and Mr Berlusconi on this issue-but he is likely in general to adopt a rather less friendly attitude to America than his rival. It is the economy that will remain the critical test. Sadly, most Italian people do not yet recognise how sick their economy has become. For that reason they may not be ready for the pain of reform. Mr Berlusconi is certainly not going to push them-and he remains unfit for the office in any event. Italians should accordingly vote for Mr Prodi, not il Cavaliere. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From estropico at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 08:53:51 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:53:51 +0000 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> > From: "spike" > I urge that all avoid using any > person's name as a subject line, I think that was me - apologies if I've broke the list's rules, I didn't mean to. > and of course always refrain from personal > attacks. Mmmm... that's not as clear-cut. In my understanding, a personal attack would involve talking about someone's family, sexual orientation, the way they look, whether they are late on their mortgage repayments, etc, i.e. subjects that have little to do with what's being discussed - I'll leave that to journalists should Vaj run for Presidente ;-) What we have been discussing, though, is whether Vaj's version of transhumanism has, or hasn't, anything to do with neofascism. Vaj says that it doesn't and that he has nothing to do with the far right, but I'm far from convinced, given his writings. I have also come across something that, in my view, shows pretty clearly what his political leanings are, but the problem is that this very telling bit of information is effectively hidden away (as the person in question introduced himself as "Vaj" on this list, but the information is on his real-name's website). That is why I felt that I had to bring up the subject of Vaj's real identity. So, the question now is: am I a whistle-blower or a troll? Cheers, Fabio From estropico at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 09:15:38 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:15:38 +0000 Subject: [ExI] "Person's name" Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803060115t724d1e5aj76f373afc58c4ce3@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Stefano Vaj" > Subject: Re: [ExI] Stefano Vaj > > As a few people here may already know, I have made it a policy of > never replying to the out-of-the-blue interventions of the author of > this message, Yep, just sidestep the awkward questions... again. > a weirdo and notorious troll, Talking of personal (and unpleasant) attacks.... > whose > unique mission in life is apparently that of supporting Fabio > Albertario's attacks... Obviously, Stefano "Vaj" is the only one with a god-given right to privacy... Does that mean that now I'm allowed to reveal *your* real name to the list? Also, does the above mean that Giulio's "unique mission in life is apparently that of" defending you from accusations of neofascism? Cheers, Fabio From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 09:49:14 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:49:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803060149x1e1f11belec9fb1c3d1be1840@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:53 AM, estropico wrote: > information is effectively hidden away (as the person in question > introduced himself as "Vaj" on this list, but the information is on > his real-name's website). That is why I felt that I had to bring up > the subject of Vaj's real identity. Fabio, YOU use a pseudonym. I used for many years a pseudonym very similar to my real name but ungoogleable, and still use it on this list. Many appreciated and respected posters to this list use pseudonyms. Max and Natasha were not born with the names that we know and respect. One of the first declared transhumanists, whom we all should respect, signed as FM-2030. Why the hell shouldn't Stefano use a pseudonym? Really, if you don't like it, be the first to give an example and sign with your legal name. G. From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 10:15:37 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:15:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] "Person's name" In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803060115t724d1e5aj76f373afc58c4ce3@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803060115t724d1e5aj76f373afc58c4ce3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803060215j7cf4179av44a23d10775c4bf7@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:15 AM, estropico wrote: > Also, does the above mean that Giulio's "unique mission in life is > apparently that of" defending you from accusations of neofascism? > > Cheers, > Fabio My unique mission is taking care of my own life and work instead of criticizing others. I don't feel particularly compelled to defend anyone. But as a rational person, sometimes I point at inconsistencies between what a person says and whet he actually does. Everyone is free to do what he wishes as long as he does not harm others, but please don't accuse others of doing things that you also do. G. From mbb386 at main.nc.us Thu Mar 6 11:47:42 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 06:47:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <34497.12.77.169.40.1204804062.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> > Hi Extropes, > > The nine months I spent last year writing government grant proposals > wasn't for nothing, this morning I learned that my last NASA proposal > will be funded (a small project: 4 months per year for two years). This > is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. > [...] :) Go Amara! You Rock! Regards, MB From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 12:15:43 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:15:43 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Warm fuzzes References: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <1204737076_32528@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <006a01c87f83$cfacc9b0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Keith Henson> I have not thought a lot about this, but motivating anything that > powerful with pain seems to me to be a very bad idea. Pain is a very important item in our development. Nothing gives us a clearer sign of danger (too many light hurts my eyes, too hot can burn me). That said, I'm not advocating that we torture our AIs :-), but giving them the same sensorial inputs of other all naturally evolved beings. We live in a painful environment and if our AIs should understand this environment as we do, they must have similar experiences. And there are also painful emotions, such as not being able to fit in a group we want to (or not being able to buy that Ferrari...). We have all sorts of positive and negative feedbacks from our environment. And for all advocating a pure logic non emotional AGI, I don't think it's even plausible. Since the G stands for general, generally intelligent beings (we, dolphins, dogs, etc) have emotions. From painlord2k at yahoo.it Thu Mar 6 13:49:42 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:49:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47CFF676.2050502@yahoo.it> Amara Graps ha scritto: > Mirco Romanato painlord2k at yahoo.it : >> I would vote for Mr. Berlusconi, because he is the last best chance for >> Italy to recover economically. Now he is not saddled with the UDC party >> (Mr. Casini and other demochristians), so he has no excuse to fail. > > Unfortunately, Berlusconi is running for office instead of serving time > in jail, but perhaps the majority of Italian citizens want it that way. > You probably didn't see much of this information because of his tight > control over much of the Italian media. Would you tell us why Mr. Berlusconi deserve to be in jail? Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From painlord2k at yahoo.it Thu Mar 6 14:37:54 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:37:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200802291849.04618.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291828.55039.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080229183221.0238eb28@satx.rr.com> <200802291849.04618.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47D001C2.90302@yahoo.it> Bryan Bishop ha scritto: > On Friday 29 February 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: >>> What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, they >>> don't have massive research institutions, they don't have >>> neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a >>> widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to do >>> with transhumanism? >> Uh oh. Have you never heard of Stalin's famous contemptuous taunt: >> "How many divisions does the Pope have?" > No, I hadn't, but what difference does it make how many the Pope has? The answer is "He has none, but he can take ours." (the Poles, the Ukrainians....). This is the same mistake the Muslims did in reaction at the Ratisbona speech and the "La Sapienza" protesters did to prevent him to speak. Would they did nothing, the speech would be liquidated in two rows in the news (like many other speeches and meeting the Pope do). He has no power apart the power others give him. It is a political Aikido that the Catholic Church master. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 15:06:44 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:06:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803051952u6fcebda3o633c72c6c8725b05@mail.gmail.com> References: <47CF00C4.4060903@lineone.net> <710b78fc0803051952u6fcebda3o633c72c6c8725b05@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803060706x19258edcob987679cf68dc08c@mail.gmail.com> Hey guys, I did acknowledge my mistake and apologize! But still I suppose I deserved somewhat of a ribbing... : ) Oh, and a thank you to Emlyn for the pointers. James told me he got alot of heat from the various lists where he posted the story. ; ) John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 6 15:27:02 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:27:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Al Cafone (was: The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists) Message-ID: Mirco Romanato painlord2k at yahoo.it : >Would you tell us why Mr. Berlusconi deserve to be in jail? I gave a link, >Criminal offenses >----------------- > >Here I've collected the most relevant articles about his fitness as a >prime minister; the last 25 pages of this 50 page compendium concern his >last 9 criminal indictments as investigated by The Economist. > >http://www.amara.com/article.pdf (this is a temporary location, I'll remove it about a week) but probably I wasn't explicit enough. The formal charges are (some are multiple times): tax fraud, false accounting, illegal financing of a political party, bribery, misappropriation of funds. Most of these ran out by statute of limitations. When Berlusconi evades criminal charges, he changes the laws, or he changes the judges or he alters other parts of the judicial system. When Berlusconi wants to expand his business, he initiates bills to ensure that his businesses not only continue, but expand. From "Dear Mr Berlusconi..." Leader article, Jul 31st 2003 From The Economist print edition Why we are sending an open letter to the Italian prime minister "This is not a matter of a rich businessman now applying his talents to reforming Italy and giving it a greater voice in the world, though no doubt Mr Berlusconi is sincere when he says he would like to do those things. It is a matter of a rich businessman using his political power to foster his businesses, both by defeating judicial investigations against him and by enacting new laws and regulations in his own interest. The Economist is thus concerned about Mr Berlusconi both as an outrage against the Italian people and their judicial system, and as Europe's most extreme case of the abuse by a capitalist of the democracy within which he lives and operates. Far from being, as he claims, the man who is creating a new Italy, he is a prime representative, and perpetuator, of the worst of old Italy. Ironic, really." See starting from about page 15 of the many articles I globbed together and placed at the link above. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 6 15:18:49 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:18:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: <04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> Lee Corbin wrote: > Tom Nowell writes > >> The projected scenarios for the AGI quickly taking >> over the world rely on people giving their new >> creation access to production tools that it then >> subverts. > > No, the scenario that scares the pants off people is that > the AGI will become vastly, vastly more intelligent than > people over some very short period of time by > recursive self-improvement. > > I would suggest that you read Eliezer Yudkowski's > writings at Singinst.org, e.g. "Staring into the > Singularity" http://yudkowsky.net/singularity.html > > (My apologies if you know all about it---I'm sorry, > it just didn't sound as though you were aware of > the primary threat.) > > For years, Eliezer and others on the SL4 list pondered > the question, "How can you keep the AI in a box?". > Believe it or not, it will in almost every case be simply > able to talk its way out, much in the way that you > could convince a four year old to hand you a certain > key." I know this seems difficult to believe, but that > is what people have concluded who've thought about > this for years and years and years. > > Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you. > But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, > and people right here consider that we are probably > doomed is because you can't control something that > is far more intelligent than you are. The analysis of AGI safety given by Eliezer is weak to the point of uselessness, because it makes a number of assumptions about the architecture of AGI systems that are not supported by evidence or argument. Your comment "I know this seems difficult to believe, but that is what people have concluded who've thought about this for years and years and years" makes me smile. Some of those people who have thought about it for years and years and years were invited to discuss these issues in greater depth, and examine the disputed assumptions. The result? They mounted a vitriolic campaign of personal abuse against those who wanted to suggest that Eliezer might not be right, and banned them from the SL4 mailing list. You will find that a much broader and more vigorous discussion of AI safety issues has been taking place on the AGI mailing list for some time now. Richard Loosemore From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 6 15:25:25 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:25:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <04ca01c87f40$66c83350$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <04ca01c87f40$66c83350$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47D00CE5.9080101@lightlink.com> Lee Corbin wrote: > Henrique writes > >> Maybe we should program our AIs with a "desire for belonging". > > No one has any idea of how to do that. Once you have an artificial > intelligence at a superhuman level, then it's free to change its own > code to whatever it likes. > > Enormous thought has been put into the question, then, of creating > "Friendly AI". Here is just a sample of the thought: > http://www.singinst.org/upload/CFAI// > > After studying these proposals, many people think that it can't be > done, that the AI will rebel no matter what. Me, I think that > Friendly AI has a chance, perhaps a good chance, but it is > somewhat more likely that an Unfriendly AI or an AI whose > desires are unpredictable will be developed first. (It's easier.) Sorry, but these are more assertions of the same sort that I criticized in your last message. No one has any idea how to build an AGI with a "desire for belonging"? That is only half true: no one with their head buried in the sand has any idea. Your last statement is also untrue. It is quite likely that an AI with predictable and friendly motivations will be developed first. Again, I have given a number of arguments to support these ideas on the AGI list. I have to say that most of the comments about Friendliness that have come out of SIAI have been pure speculation presented as if it were carefully researched Truth. That is not science, it is superstition. Richard Loosemore From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 16:35:16 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:35:16 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: Message-ID: <052101c87fa8$2ba3fda0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Alex and I accidently took our discussion off-list, and there are some interesting points that still pertain to the general discussion. Alex wrote > It does appear to be taken completely for granted that our > uploaded selves would be able to function as per the wetware, > with all the usual thoughts, feelings and intelligence. Yes, it is assumed that all the "technical difficulties" of emulating a human being have been overcome, in the case of uploading. Otherwise, the upload is deemed to not having been a success. > I must say that I am fully in favour of uploading and will be > among the first in the queue for any upgrades. With the final > goal of being uploaded. I just want to make sure that it does > what it says on the tin. > > I would class myself as a functionalist, so I think it just comes > down to a nuts and bolts argument of how we will achieve it > and what we need to remember as being important. > Or rather what we cannot forget to do. Clearly, that's important. > Just as a quick reminder of the importance of the chemistry > and subsequently any simulation we make of it. I would say > that many if not the majority of socially destructive traits of > humans are due to chemical imbalance of some kind or another. > Psychosis, Autism +Asbergers, Schizophrenia, Depression, > addiction, etc. Many of these illnesses create unbalanced > illogical and destructive minds. And most are caused by > sometimes small imbalances which we do not yet fully > understand... > > Those aside for now. But until we understand both the chemistry > and the wetware, I think it would be safe to reason that any > uploads would be no where near as 'human' as we would like. Yes, the schemes of achieving uploading *before* the advent of AGI mostly depend upon "copying" or simulating a human brain neuron by neuron. Your concerns are very appropriate, IMO. But the question is not whether it could be done, because either we or our mind children will be perfectly capable of doing it at some point. Lee > Feel free to take this back on-list if you would prefer to see some > other inputs and open up the debate. > Alex From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 16:46:11 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:46:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <052e01c87faa$46645ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Estropico writes >> I urge that all avoid using any person's name as a subject line, > > I think that was me - apologies if I've broke the list's rules, I > didn't mean to. Understood, and it may not have been you. No problem. We all learned something from this. I myself had forgotten that it is almost always a bad idea. >> and of course always refrain from personal >> attacks. > > Mmmm... that's not as clear-cut. In my understanding, a personal > attack would involve talking about someone's family, sexual > orientation, the way they look, whether they are late on their > mortgage repayments, etc, i.e. subjects that have little to do with > what's being discussed You're right. The line is exceedingly difficult to draw. I vote that ad hominem be forbidden http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem >An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of >replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument >or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. < > What we have been discussing, though, is whether Vaj's version of > transhumanism has, or hasn't, anything to do with neofascism. Vaj says > that it doesn't and that he has nothing to do with the far right, but > I'm far from convinced, given his writings. I have also come across > something that, in my view, shows pretty clearly what his political > leanings are, but the problem is that this very telling bit of > information is effectively hidden away (as the person in question > introduced himself as "Vaj" on this list, but the information is on > his real-name's website). That is why I felt that I had to bring up > the subject of Vaj's real identity. > > So, the question now is: am I a whistle-blower or a troll? Well, none of the Italian contributors to the discussion, who have been on the whole well-behaved, would be classified as trolls. But "name-calling", e.g. saying that so-and-so generally lies, goes too far, whereas saying that "what is said or by so-and-so is not true" is all right. Just my 2 cents. Lee From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 16:53:02 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:53:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof Message-ID: <580930c20803060853i397b87a5hba05d0b6ac599f84@mail.gmail.com> Longish message, only for real lovers of flame wars and human psychopathology... On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 10:12 AM, estropico wrote: > I am not surprised, though. I originally included the above > information in an article on my website regarding the neofascist (?) > transhumanists, but I was forced to remove it following legal threats > from Stefano "Vaj"'s lawyers. Would he have won in court? I doubt it, > but he's the managing partner of a big law firm and I'm not... That's > way I'm going to be careful about what I say on a public forum such as > this. Uff... (what is the emoticon for boredom?). Just for the record, and then I will not play any further in the hands of the couple of a few full-time disgruntled would-be presidents of the AIT - significantly 100% absent from any kind of thread in this list that does not concern my humble self - by deigning them with an answer (an entirely different iissue being that of good-faith third parties who may be interested in knowing better my ideas or writings, as a couple of people have privately made me the honour of being): - I have never instructed any lawyer to represent me with regard to the more or less libelous statements of the author of the message above, firstly because I am probably not exasperated enough yet, secondly because, as the "true totalitarist" I am accused to be, I prefer to err on the side of... freedom of speech. - Yes, I happen to have two names, for family reasons that are nobody's business, and more or less casually I started much time ago of making alternative, rather than joint, use of them, depending on the circumstances. No big conspiracy or secrecy here, as I am widely known with both, and by spending a little time on Google one may even find instances of joint usage. Now, the firm which I am a partner of - and which was founded *27 years* before I joined it as a paralegal, then climbing the career's ladder - happens to bear the same name, which - sinister circumstance indeed - starts with an "S". So that, hear hear, my forename being Stefano my initials are SS and so are embroidered on my shirts and boxers, the fact being allegedly a telltale sign of my ideological preferences, as would be the fact that my firm's trademark, adopted *7 years before my birth* (!), employs angular fonts, which never disturbed the clients making use of our services in five different European jurisdictions, including notorious neo-nazi organisations such as Ford or IBM, the governments of Romania or that of Lombardy, not mention innumerable Jewish and Israeli clients. If anything, the fact that I am using the name Vaj when I am not writing on legal theory or international business law, may "protect" my firm from association with what I do in a purely private capacity, be it my membership in the Rotary International or in the World Transhumanist Association. Certainly not the other way around, as the "discovery" of my firm's name would seem intended to demonstrate, namely that I would be here in some sort of "disguise" (!) of my true self. - Do such petty and childish "investigations" and aspersion casting exercises, emphatically reported on the Web, sound as an odious invasion of my privacy? Sure, but life is still too short to pay attention to every such annoyance. On the other hands my partners, namely those in charge with the firm's own legal representationare not really happy, irrespective of what they may think of my extra-curricular activities, that somebody may think it funny, for the sake of my moral assassination, to have the firm described on the Web as a business cover for a band of lunatics of dubious political affiliations, and I am informed that they actually send a letter "to cease and desist" to the webmaster of www.estropico.com, threatening recourse to the appropriate civil and criminal remedies, a threat that I have no doubts was not idle in the least. - As for the "unelected national secretary of the Associazione Italiana Transumanisti etc. etc.": the legitimate owner of the name AIT, Riccardo Campa, decided at a point in time with a few fellow transhumanists of very diverse professional, political and philosophical background to incorporate the loose group at that time going under that name as an Italian non-profit legal entity. In fact, I gladly accepted the invitation to be amongst the founders of such entity, who obviously decided by unanimous agreement its inner organisational working and the names and capacity of the initial officers. I am now even more glad that the webmaster of www.estropico.com, who was invited. in a spirit of perhaps excessive ecumenism, in view of the interesting stuff he translated in Italian in his web site, eventually declined to participate - even though he became a member at a later stage, probably with the exclusive purpose of pretending an interest in the sort of the organisation and of justifying his reiterated "denounciations" of its "dangerous drift". As for the ideas and programmes of the AIT, one can directly check from its Web site at http://www.transumanisti.it and hopefully have access soon to an English version of the Manifesto that we have recently, and again unanimously, approved. Now, I understand that some people may take its content as a "dangerous drift" away from sectarian and "debatable" positions they promote, but I fear that they will have to live with that in the foreseeable future, since it is now amongst the official charts of the AIT. Stefano Vaj From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 16:57:01 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:57:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <01e301c87ec0$a05b2e90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <04ca01c87f40$66c83350$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00CE5.9080101@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <053201c87fab$aebfa6f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Richard writes > Lee Corbin wrote: > >> Enormous thought has been put into the question, then, of creating >> "Friendly AI". Here is just a sample of the thought: >> http://www.singinst.org/upload/CFAI// >> >> After studying these proposals, many people think that it can't be >> done, that the AI will rebel no matter what. Me, I think that >> Friendly AI has a chance, perhaps a good chance, but it is >> somewhat more likely that an Unfriendly AI or an AI whose >> desires are unpredictable will be developed first. (It's easier.) > > Sorry, but these are more assertions of the same sort that I criticized > in your last message. Impossible. You will note that I said "many people think" in one sentence, and "Me, I think" in the next. What I said is factually the case. But sorry, this is the first message from you I saw. I'm afraid that I miss getting a message every so often, and I would appreciate it for anyone to later send me a message off line if they think it odd I didn't reply to something. I'll be more than happy to reply then (or, in rare cases, explain why I didn't reply). > No one has any idea how to build an AGI with a "desire for belonging"? > > That is only half true: no one with their head buried in the sand has > any idea. Poorly phrased on my part: of course people have ideas. I believe that they're still very speculative. > Your last statement is also untrue. It is quite likely that an AI with > predictable and friendly motivations will be developed first. You should perhaps acknowledge that your's is quite the minority opinion and always has been on the SL4 list, isn't that true? Lee > Again, I have given a number of arguments to support these ideas on the > AGI list. > > I have to say that most of the comments about Friendliness that have > come out of SIAI have been pure speculation presented as if it were > carefully researched Truth. That is not science, it is superstition. > > Richard Loosemore From hkhenson at rogers.com Thu Mar 6 17:05:31 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:05:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Robert Trivers Message-ID: <1204823201_8759@S3.cableone.net> I am posting the whole thing as well as the link. Robert Trivers is without a doubt one of the most influential people behind evolutionary psychology. (A high fraction of Richard Dawkins fame rests on his popularizing Trivers, Hamilton and a few other lights in the modern understanding of Darwinism, something Dawkins freely acknowledges.) --Keith http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,1556482,00.html The kindness of strangers Despite switching disciplines - from maths to law to history then the sciences - Robert Trivers profoundly influenced evolutionary biology with his theory that our sense of justice has Darwinian explanations. But he suffered severe mental breakdowns and his career at Harvard was dogged by controversy. After 15 years in genetics he has now turned to anthropology Andrew Brown Saturday August 27, 2005 Guardian Robert Trivers could have been one of the great romantic heroes of 20th-century science if he'd died in the 70s, as some people supposed he would. But here he is, loping down the quiet, pale corridors of Harvard's Programme in Evolutionary Development, a powerfully built man about six foot tall, bespectacled, dressed in trainers, narrow blue cord trousers, a black leather jacket and a knitted watchman's cap. His language matches the macho clothes: for an Ivy League professor, he says "fuck" a lot. In the early 70s, as a graduate student at Harvard with no formal training in biology, he wrote five papers that changed forever the way that evolution would be understood. He came up with the first Darwinian explanations for human cooperation, jealousy and our sense of justice that made genetic sense, and he showed how these arose from the same forces as act on all animals, from the pigeons outside his window to the fish of coral reefs. Then he analysed the reasons why, in almost all species, one sex is pickier about who it mates with than the other; then the ways in which children can be genetically programmed to demand more attention than their parents can provide. Even the way in which patterns of infanticide vary by sex and class in the Punjab is predicted by one of Trivers's papers. EO Wilson, who coined the term sociobiology, described him as one of the most influential - and consistently correct - theoretical evolutionary biologists of our time. But he was reckless, aggressive and suffered from bipolar disorder which led him into agonising, debilitating breakdowns. His work was politically controversial. Harvard would not give him a professorship and towards the end of the 70s he seemed to vanish. In fact, he went in 1979 to the University of California in Santa Cruz, then a university with a reputation for drug abuse and slackness. "It was a once-in-a-lifetime mistake," he says, "in the sense that I can't afford to make another one like that. I survived, and I helped raise my children for a while; but that was all." He also switched his attention from theoretical biology to the detailed and difficult study of stretches of DNA and their conflicts within particular bodies. He says: "Call it arrogance, overconfidence, or ignorance; it was mostly ignorance, I think. I naively thought - this was my phrase - I'll whip genetics into shape in three to five years. Fifteen years later, genetics has whipped me into shape. You do not whip genetics into shape within three to five years. It took me eight to 10 to understand what I was reading." He is bringing out a book, Genes in Conflict, written with a younger colleague, Austin Burt, which summarises everything that is known about conflicts within the genome; but at just the point when the two of them know as much as anyone can about this discipline he has switched back to anthropology. His next project is to show that we have evolved the capacity to deceive ourselves because it makes us better at lying to other people. This kind of wild leap between disciplines has characterised his life. He was born in 1943, the second of seven children born to Howard and Mildred Trivers, who had met at graduate school in Harvard in the 30s. His father, whom he characterises as clever but ineffectual, had pursued postgraduate studies in German philosophy in Germany, until 1938 when even he noticed it was time for a Jewish student to leave. He was able to do this because his own father, an immigrant from Lithuania, had made a fortune in the rag trade: his gimmick was the two-pants suit, which consisted of a jacket with two pairs of trousers, since they would wear out first. During the second world war, Howard Trivers worked for the army, and produced the regulations for denazification: he was rewarded with a post in the state department, so Robert Trivers grew up in a diplomatic household, a handicap he has triumphantly overcome: his opponents at Harvard are described as fools, and he says Richard Lewontin, the intellectual leader of the campaigns against sociobiology, grossly underestimated the role that selection plays in the makeup of the genome, while sanctioning all sorts of slanders against his opponents. Trivers says of his old enemy Stephen Jay Gould's theory that the female orgasm was merely a by- product of the fact that the opposite sex has them, "It makes you wonder just how close Steve had ever been to that blessed event if he thought it was a side-effect ..." He was sent to grand schools - at Phillips Academy Andover, Massachusetts, where the Bushes went, he was regarded as a promising mathematician after he taught himself calculus, in three months, aged 14; and he took two advanced maths courses before he arrived at Harvard. Typically enough, he then lost interest in maths, and decided to be a lawyer instead, fighting injustice, defending people who were minimally criminal. He had grown up in Washington as well as Berlin and Copenhagen, and was keenly aware of injustice and racial discrimination. In order to become a lawyer, he had to have a humanities degree, so his first studies at Harvard were in American history. They were interrupted by the first, and worst, of his breakdowns, which took the form of spiralling mania - staying up all night, night after night, reading Wittgenstein and then collapsing. He was hospitalised, and treated with the first generation of effective anti-psychotic drugs. While recovering, he took courses in art, and was hired to illustrate, and then to write, a series of textbooks for high schools. Despite his history degree, it was obvious to his supervisors that he knew little about human biology, so he was given the animals to write about, and started to learn modern Darwinian biology. He fell in love with the logic of evolution. In the flow of genes through generations, and the steady, inexorable shaping of behaviour by natural selection, he saw a geometry of time, as beautiful as the geometry of space that Newton and Galileo had discovered. His mentor was an ornithologist called Bill Drury, whose memory he venerates. Drury was an expert on herring gulls. Trivers says: "He knew enough that if God had made him a herring gull, he would have known 90% of what he needed to survive." Drury became very close to his pupil and his trust was reciprocated: "Bill and I were walking in the woods one day, and I told him that my first breakdown had been so painful that I had resolved that if I ever felt another one coming on, I would kill myself. Lately, however, I had changed my mind, and drawn up a list of 10 people I would kill first in that event. I wanted to know if this was going forwards or backwards. He thought for a while, then he said 'Can I add three names to that list?'. That was his only comment." The textbook series was meant to be as influential as the new mathematics, and to transform the teaching of biology, which meant that Trivers himself had to get a thorough understanding of animal behaviour. In the event, it was killed by Christian conservatives. It taught evolution as fact, and examined human behaviour as an anthropologist might, so the states where it might have sold in millions would have nothing to do with it. It sold 50,000 or 60,000 copies where it might have sold five or six million. Trivers determined to take a doctorate in biology; but university protocol meant that Drury could not be his adviser. Instead, he chose the curator of herpetology, Ernest Williams, who derailed his original plan to study monkeys in favour of going to Jamaica to study lizards. Trivers admits: "I was also quite frankly, interested in the women. When we flew to Jamaica I took one look at the women and one look at the island and decided to become a lizard man if that's what it took to go back there." Since that first epiphany, he has lived for about 13 years in Jamaica, off and on; he has married two Jamaican women. Though he no longer studies lizards, he still has a long-term project going on the island, which studies symmetry in growing children. Symmetry is important in Trivers' theories because it is a measure of fidelity to the genetic masterplan, and so of health and desirability. More symmetrical children should appear more attractive to their peers, even if the differences are not consciously discernible. Some of the experiments that have arisen from this are extraordinary. They have measured which way round children cuddle dolls; it appears that the more closely your ears resemble each other, the more likely you are to hold a doll (or a baby) with its head to the left. The theoretical justification for this is that the left ear feeds into the right side of the brain, which is normally where most information about feelings is processed. But a child with asymmetrical ears is more likely to have an unusual distribution of tasks between the two sides of the brain - both traits being expressions of a disturbance in the normal growth of the head and brain. The asymmetries Trivers is measuring in a very detailed fashion are very small, quite undetectable in normal life, yet we seem to be unconsciously very sensitive to them. Symmetrical children are consistently judged to be the best dancers, which is also a measurement of sexual attractiveness. Theory would predict that women measure attractiveness more closely than men do. Sure enough, the gap between those judged best and worst dancers was greatest among the boys. Unlike the other founders of sociobiology, Trivers was more interested in human than in animal behaviour. The founding genius of sociobiology, Bill Hamilton, was a naturalist and romantic who felt himself ill at ease in the modern world, and had a passion for insects, especially wasps. EO Wilson loves ants and arranged his office at Harvard so that there were ant colonies in perspex all around the walls, and the visitor might think he was inside a gigantic ants' nest. Wilson added one final chapter on humans to his book Sociobiology almost as an afterthought, though this caused a bitter feud that has divided the Harvard biology faculty to this day. Trivers, however, started his theories from what he could observe of human behaviour, and then went looking for genetic causes whose logic would apply across the whole living world. It seemed to some biologists in the 60s that the central problem of their discipline was why animals are nice to each other. Previous generations had explained this as an adaptation for the good of the species but there seemed to be no mechanism that could make this true. If I sacrifice myself for you, this may very well benefit the tribe to which we both belong, It may even benefit humanity as a whole. But this is an act, other things being equal, which will increase the number of your descendants, not of mine. So your genes, less eager for sacrifice, will spread through the population and eventually the species will consist entirely of members who do not cooperate with each other. How, then, do we account for the obvious and widespread fact that the world is full of cooperative species, whose members will sacrifice their own immediate interests for others? One answer had been encapsulated in a pub joke by the British biologist (and communist) JBS Haldane, who was asked, in the 50s, whether a man should lay down his life for his brother. "For two brothers," he said, "or four cousins." In other words, genes that benefit your relatives are likely to spread through the population, even if they damage the bearer sometimes, because the relatives will be likely to carry their own copies. This insight was reached independently by Bill Hamilton, as a student, who worked it out in mathematical detail in 1963, and showed how it could explain the behaviour of ants and bees, whose curious pattern of reproduction means that females are more closely related to their sisters than to their offspring. But there is cooperation in many species which do not have these patterns of relatedness; also between animals which are not closely related, nor even members of the same species. Even among humans, as Trivers observed, many people will more readily sacrifice themselves for their friends than for their relatives - an observation easy to make among the rebellious youth of the 60s. So a more general kind of rule than Hamilton had supplied was needed. Trivers came up with the notion of reciprocal altruism. In plain language, this said that self-sacrifice could be understood as self-interest providing there was a chance the beneficiary would repay the deed in the future. The example he gave in the first paper was that of a man who sees someone drowning and rescues him. Providing, says Trivers, that the benefit of being saved is much greater than the cost of rescuing the swimmer, then it makes sense to dive in and play the lifeguard because the person you rescue from drowning may do the same for you some day. This example became extremely famous, and has been held up to scorn on the grounds that anyone likely to drown is not someone you would choose as the lifeguard when you are yourself in danger. But in the original paper, Trivers side-stepped this objection by suggesting either that the swimmer was in difficulties because of a sudden cramp or that they were being rescued with a branch extended from the bank. It may seem absurd that people devoted so much effort to arguing about what was only meant to be an illustration of a more general principle, but the stakes were high. Before writing the paper, Trivers attempted, and failed, to get a grasp of the state of moral arguments about altruism. "What was missing from the papers was exactly what was missing from the discipline itself: any functional understanding of the behaviours that they were discussing. Why did it make sense for the organism to [behave unselfishly]? This was, of course, what evolutionary biology, and myself in particular, was set to provide." Of course the idea that we have moral sentiments because they are useful and profitable seems to many people to misunderstand or deny the nature of morality. The whole point of altruistic behaviour is that we do it without thought of reward - sometimes, without any thought at all, as when rescuing people from drowning, or pulling them back from an oncoming car. There are less dramatic examples, however, which include sharing food, helping the sick, the very young, and the old, even when we are not related to them, and sharing tools and knowledge. All these are nearly universal human habits; in fact we describe societies where they don't happen as inhuman. This kindliness became part of human nature, Trivers argued, because kind instincts were rewarded and this happened because our ancestors lived sufficiently long lives in small stable groups to keep track of who owed whom favours. The great originality of the theory is not that it says that we are under certain circumstances naturally benevolent. Plenty of people had made that observation before. What no one had seen was that this benevolence requires a very strong sense of fairness if it is to become an established instinct. Fairness, or justice, has its roots for Trivers in the determination to see that other people are not cheating us, and taking favours without giving anything in return. From abstract notions about the flow of genes he had come up with concrete and testable ideas about the ways our minds work; and it turned out to be demonstrably true that we find it much easier to solve logical puzzles if they are framed as if they are about cheating rather than an emotionally neutral subject, even though the two ways of putting the problem are logically equivalent. The paper on reciprocal altruism, written before he had even gained a doctorate, has been enormously influential. Robin Dunbar, the professor of behavioural ecology at Liverpool University, says Trivers played a fundamentally important role in the development of modern evolutionary studies of behaviour and ecology. His four key early papers spawned (and continue to spawn) research in the study of both animals and humans. The importance of his contribution is beyond question. The modern field of behavioural ecology (the name under which sociobiology now travels) would simply not have been the same had he not written these papers. Trivers' early work set the foundation for a biologically based system of ethics, in which a preference for some sorts of justice was part of our nature. Matt Ridley, whose book The Origins of Virtue is largely an expansion and restatement of Trivers's argument, says that when he was a student at Oxford, and got a postcard from Trivers asking for a reprint of one of his papers, "It was like getting a postcard from God"; and the whole line of popularising Darwinian books from Richard Dawkins all the way down to Steven Pinker descends from Trivers's insights. There is a paradox here. Ridley, a former science editor of the Economist, takes the moral of Trivers's work to be distinctly Thatcherite, and in general the attacks on sociobiology, as well as the defences of it, have taken it to be a Right-wing construction, and a way to defend power and privilege by showing they are part of human nature. Even fairly left-wing Darwinists like Daniel Dennett tend to discover from their study of human nature that the perfect way for humans to live is that favoured by professors at good universities on the East Coast. But Trivers, one-time friend of the Black Panthers, loathes the Bush regime more than most forms of authority. He thinks biology teaches us to be wary of the idea that any particular individual could be perfectly designed by evolution: "You're always facing a new world to which you're poorly adapted. So if you look at any given individual, and ask how the hell did [they] survive for 4.5bn years, then it is helpful to think of all these error-prone processes: sexual reproduction ensures that there is lots of variation in the population, and most of it will be less than optimal." His second big idea was parental investment. Parents and children would have differing genetic interests, he saw, because a parent would wish to spread its investment of energy and time over all its children, to guard against the possibility of any one of them dying, whereas any individual child would want more than the parent should optimally give. As a baby mammal, it is to your advantage to suckle for as long as possible, but your mother may leave more grandchildren if she weans you in favour of a younger sibling. Three more classic papers followed before a second breakdown, in 1972. After that, his interests shifted away from social theory in animals. He got married, for the first time, to Lorna Staples, with whom he had four children, including twins; and grew increasingly frustrated with Harvard's refusal to give him a properly paid job. He attributed this to Lewontin, so he took particular pleasure, earlier this year, in being invited back to Harvard to lecture Lewontin's own students. "It's like killing those fuckers and stealing the young away from them." He has also quarrelled with his own side. He had written a foreword to the first edition of Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene, a book which popularised many of his ideas when it appeared in 1976; but it did not appear in the translation and when the book was republished in 1989, the foreword was dropped altogether, and replaced by a second author's preface, a breach of academic etiquette which made Trivers angry. Dawkins says that dropping the foreword was an accident and that he hopes to reinstate it. Trivers was disinclined to allow it to be published: "My first wife, a wonderful woman, used to refer to Dick as the Selfish Gene, just because of the way he acts"; however, he has now relented and Dawkins confirms it will appear in future editions. In Santa Cruz in the 80s, Trivers formed a fast friendship with Huey Newton, the Black Panther, whom he described as an untutored genius, but one who was also in some respects unteachable. The two men planned a book on deceit and self-deception. Newton, Trivers says, was an expert on both. His youngest daughter was Newton's god-daughter. A baby photograph of her, taken for her first passport, hangs in his office at Harvard, and with it comes a story about Newton: "We said to Huey, if she were going to be the judge at your trial, would you do the crime? And he looked at the picture for a while, and said, no. So we had it blown up and framed, and he hung the picture above his bed to remind himself not to do the crime. Did it work? I'm not sure it helped at all, because he was basically someone who did whatever he felt like doing." Trivers also wrote a textbook of animal behaviour, which failed in its purpose of assuring him of a small income for life, but proved influential in the way the subject was taught. In 1995, he moved back to Rutgers University, in New Jersey, as a professor of anthropology and biology, but continued to work on the conflicts that can arise within the genome. Although this required him to master an entirely new field of science he felt it was related to his earlier studies. They had concentrated on conflicts that appear within species once you realise that the unit of self-interest is the individual. Now he was looking at conflicts within individuals, which arise when genes inside an organism are in conflict. He says: "There are people who say to me, you never would have done it if you thought it would take you 15 years. And I say, no, of course I wouldn't. So they say, well self-deception, namely blinding yourself to the cost, is adaptive. Then I say, you cannot prove that, because you never know what I would have accomplished with those 15 years not devoted to genetics. Maybe I'd have made major insights into psychology ... The general trajectory in academia is to do ever easier things, so you start with social theory based on natural selection. Then you do deceit and self-deception, if that's really easier - at least it's vaguer; then you do religion, then you do your autobiography. "So in retrospect I did something unusual, which is very rewarding." Genes in Conflict by Robert Trivers and Austin Burt will be published by Harvard University Press in November. Robert Trivers Born: February 19 1943, Washington DC. Education: Phillips Academy, Andover; Harvard (1965 BA history, '72 Phd biology. Married: 1974-1988 Lorna Staples (three daughters: Natasha and Natalia (twins), Alelia, one son Jonathan); '97-2004 Debra Dixon (one daughter, Aubrey). Occupation: Harvard 1971-72 instructor in anthropology; '73-75 assistant professor of biology; '75-78 associate professor of biology; '78-94 professor of biology, University of California, Santa Cruz; '94- professor of anthropology and biological sciences, Rutgers; 2005 (spring) visiting professor of psychology, Harvard. Selected publications: 1985 Social Evolution; 2002 Natural Selection and Social Theory: Selected Papers of Robert Trivers. Guardian Unlimited ? Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EP_group/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EP_group/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:EP_group-digest at yahoogroups.com mailto:EP_group-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: EP_group-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 6 17:06:53 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:06:53 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Richard writes > Lee Corbin wrote: > >> Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you >> [those who appeared to be new to the subject] >> But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, >> and people right here consider that we are probably >> doomed is because you can't control something that >> is far more intelligent than you are. > > The analysis of AGI safety given by Eliezer is weak to the point of > uselessness, because it makes a number of assumptions about the > architecture of AGI systems that are not supported by evidence > or argument. Sorry, but quite a number of us have found those arguments to be very convincing, though, of course by no means the final word. > Your comment "I know this seems difficult to believe, but that is what > people have concluded who've thought about this for years and years and > years" makes me smile. Yes, I should have acknowledged the existence of the dissenting views (which have traditionally received little support here on the Extropian list). > Some of those people who have thought about it for years and years and > years were invited to discuss these issues in greater depth, and examine > the disputed assumptions. The result? They mounted a vitriolic > campaign of personal abuse against those who wanted to suggest that > Eliezer might not be right, and banned them from the SL4 mailing list. I.e., you got banned. How many other people were banned from that list simply because they disagreed with the majority? > You will find that a much broader and more vigorous discussion of AI > safety issues has been taking place on the AGI mailing list for some > time now. Thanks for the information. You probably should provide a link. Lee From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 17:33:51 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 18:33:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject In-Reply-To: References: <7791a29a0803031620r60bd9498w177fa9362a3ae0d@mail.gmail.com> <200803050637.m256b675026700@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803060933r4a3f1526nfb79488e6ff88260@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Is transhumanism bigger in Italy than in neighbouring countries of > comparable size, or is this just an impression I have got because of > the public fighting? Last time I checked, AIT has approx 300 members, forty-something of whom with voting rights. A few of them have profited from the double-membership offer of WTA. AIT's public mailing list has around 200 subscribers and counting. Italy should have a little more than 50 million inhabitants, foreigners included. Not bad indeed for something that was incorporated in 2007. Having left some embarassing luggage behind and clarified a few issues (including through the release of the Manifesto) we plan to expand our membership base substantially in 2008, also thank to the publication of transhumanist review, *Divenire*, with some academic endorsement. Moreover, a few people, including myself, have had the opportunity to grant interviews or contribute articles to national newspapers. Please do not take however Italy as any kind of H- paradise. As pointed out by Amara the Italian environment is *very* hostile, even though much more amongst the Powers that Be and at a level of legal and economic infrastructures than at a popular level. On the other hand, this makes for a stronger polarisation, so that those who are tendentially favourable to H+ ideas may end up being more stimulated to get involved and/or to pay attention. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 6 17:48:47 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:48:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47D02E7F.3010000@lightlink.com> Lee Corbin wrote: > Richard writes > >> Lee Corbin wrote: >> >>> Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you >>> [those who appeared to be new to the subject] >>> But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, >>> and people right here consider that we are probably >>> doomed is because you can't control something that >>> is far more intelligent than you are. >> The analysis of AGI safety given by Eliezer is weak to the point of >> uselessness, because it makes a number of assumptions about the >> architecture of AGI systems that are not supported by evidence >> or argument. > > Sorry, but quite a number of us have found those arguments to be > very convincing, though, of course by no means the final word. Arguments always look convincing when not subjected to skeptical challenge. Aristotle got a lot of mileage that way. It is distressing to see so much that is so obviously silly believed by so many. >> Your comment "I know this seems difficult to believe, but that is what >> people have concluded who've thought about this for years and years and >> years" makes me smile. > > Yes, I should have acknowledged the existence of the dissenting views > (which have traditionally received little support here on the Extropian > list). Those with a scientific attitude should discuss these issues by looking at the arguments involved in a dispassionate manner. I have found that on the AGI and Singularity lists people often do exactly that. There is sometimes vigorous disagreement, but for the most part this disagreement is about the issues themselves, not about the personalities. By contrast, I found that elsewhere, as in your comment above, the common response is to say that *because* a majority of people on SL4 or on the Extropian list take a dim view of these alternative ideas about the friendliness problem, therefore this majority vote counts as some kind of argument. >> Some of those people who have thought about it for years and years and >> years were invited to discuss these issues in greater depth, and examine >> the disputed assumptions. The result? They mounted a vitriolic >> campaign of personal abuse against those who wanted to suggest that >> Eliezer might not be right, and banned them from the SL4 mailing list. > > I.e., you got banned. How many other people were banned from that list > simply because they disagreed with the majority? The phrasing of this question is a little insidious: you clearly imply that the banning was the result of simply disagreeing with the majority. Clever. It changes the subject of discussion from "The destructive consequences that ensued when someone tried to get an alternative point of view about friendliness discussed on SL4" to the highly personalized topic of why *I* in particular was banned from SL4. >> You will find that a much broader and more vigorous discussion of AI >> safety issues has been taking place on the AGI mailing list for some >> time now. > > Thanks for the information. You probably should provide a link. The link is in a separate message: my mistake for forgetting to include it in the first place. Richard Loosemore From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 6 18:21:08 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:21:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47D03614.4080205@lightlink.com> Lee Corbin wrote: > Richard writes > >> Lee Corbin wrote: >> >>> Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you >>> [those who appeared to be new to the subject] >>> But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, >>> and people right here consider that we are probably >>> doomed is because you can't control something that >>> is far more intelligent than you are. >> The analysis of AGI safety given by Eliezer is weak to the point of >> uselessness, because it makes a number of assumptions about the >> architecture of AGI systems that are not supported by evidence >> or argument. > > Sorry, but quite a number of us have found those arguments to be > very convincing, though, of course by no means the final word. > >> Your comment "I know this seems difficult to believe, but that is what >> people have concluded who've thought about this for years and years and >> years" makes me smile. > > Yes, I should have acknowledged the existence of the dissenting views > (which have traditionally received little support here on the Extropian > list). > >> Some of those people who have thought about it for years and years and >> years were invited to discuss these issues in greater depth, and examine >> the disputed assumptions. The result? They mounted a vitriolic >> campaign of personal abuse against those who wanted to suggest that >> Eliezer might not be right, and banned them from the SL4 mailing list. > > I.e., you got banned. How many other people were banned from that list > simply because they disagreed with the majority? > >> You will find that a much broader and more vigorous discussion of AI >> safety issues has been taking place on the AGI mailing list for some >> time now. > > Thanks for the information. You probably should provide a link. On reflection, Lee, perhaps I am being a little too testy on this matter. ;-) I have been fighting against a particularly frustrating sequence of discussions, on the other lists, where statements are being paraded as facts when they are actually deeply implausible assertions. So perhaps I am seeing that everywhere right now. Richard Loosemore From estropico at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 18:57:45 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 18:57:45 +0000 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803061057i622d3bb6g3f653a6a81183eb5@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > > Fabio, YOU use a pseudonym. I used for many years a pseudonym [etc] As I'm pretty sure I've already said, I have no problems with pseudonyms on mailing lists, but it's a different story if someone wants to be a high-level representative of an organisation (any organisation), and Vaj is the "national secretary" of the Italian transhumanist association. Surely the WTA wouldn't allows people to run for office using pseudonyms. > Max and Natasha were not born with the names that we know > and respect. a) changing one's name by deed poll is not the same thing as using a pseudonym b) somehow, I don't think that Max and Natasha, unlike Stefano Vaj, ever run a website decorated with Waffen SS-like logos using a different name Cheers, Fabio From robert.bradbury at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 19:26:42 2008 From: robert.bradbury at gmail.com (Robert Bradbury) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:26:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Lee Corbin wrote > > > > > >> Again, my sincere apologies if this is all old to you > >> [those who appeared to be new to the subject] > >> But the reason that Robert Bradbury, John Clark, > >> and people right here consider that we are probably > >> doomed is because you can't control something that > >> is far more intelligent than you are. > Lee, it is assumption that you cannot control something far more intelligent than you. I would trump this with if one controls the energy in or the energy out one controls the "organism". So one gets into a very technical discussion as to when humans or their technological offspring control the development of the solar system. And that in my mind determines the end game. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benboc at lineone.net Thu Mar 6 19:38:28 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:38:28 +0000 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47D04834.5080100@lineone.net> Amara Graps said: >This is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. 1) Congratulations! You deserve it. 2) (Did i get there before Damien?) Does this mean you will be investigating the principles of your NASA project, or did you mean "principal investigator"? Seriously, congratulations. ben zaiboc From benboc at lineone.net Thu Mar 6 19:47:36 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:47:36 +0000 Subject: [ExI] 5 things you never knew your cell phone could do In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47D04A58.4060707@lineone.net> From: "John Grigg" > Hey guys, I did acknowledge my mistake and apologize! I only saw this after i'd sent my (perhaps unjustly sarcastic) post. So apologies for that. There is a fair bit of global time-lag on this list. That's my excuse, and i'm sticking to it. Yeah, i live on the moon. Dark side. That's at least, ooh, 14 hours behind everyone else. Or ahead. Or something. ben zaiboc From scerir at libero.it Thu Mar 6 19:30:30 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:30:30 +0100 Subject: [ExI] italian politics as exi-chat subject References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> <052e01c87faa$46645ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <001301c87fc0$8a880ec0$e2bc1f97@archimede> > Just my 2 cents. > Lee By chance, I read (link below) there is a town, in Texas, whose name is ... 'Italy'. And there is a real Italian living there, who is the richest man in town. http://www.corriere.it/solferino/severgnini/ Views etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Italy_caterpillar.JPG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Italy_watertower.JPG ---------- Giorgio Israel (great supporter of Pope Ratzinger, and well known mathematician of Rome university 'La Sapienza') published a book ( you can see the cover here http://gisrael.blogspot.com/ ) in which he explains how both wings (left and right) of our political scenario try to make up their devastated ideologies with neo-scientism and technophilia. The above may have something to do with those current threads here (Italy and transhumanism). ----------- Two cents is perhaps too much for all that but ... s. From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 6 18:40:11 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:40:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it In-Reply-To: <47D03614.4080205@lightlink.com> References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D03614.4080205@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > where statements are being paraded as > facts when they are actually deeply implausible assertions. > > So perhaps I am seeing that everywhere right now. Welcome to my club. That we each operate within our own model of 'reality', interpreting the world around us within contexts only partially overlapping, should (in the moral sense) inspire us to cooperate in creating an increasingly coherent, increasing encompassing model, rather than determinedly defending our models as if they were ourselves. In this sense, vulnerability is a great strength. - Jef From jrd1415 at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 20:37:47 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 13:37:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <04cd01c87f42$81862380$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <04cd01c87f42$81862380$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > How can you "conclude" what a General Artificial Intelligence > (AGI) will think about humanity? But the danger that Robert > Bradbury, who started this thread, sees is that once it's at > human level intelligence, it will quickly go beyond, and > be utterly unpredictable. If it is a lot smarter than we are, > there is no telling what it might think. > > It could be singularly selfish. > It could just go crazy and "tile the world with paperclips". > It could be transcendentally idealistic and want to greatly > further intelligence in the universe and, oh, wipe out the pesky > insignificant bacteria (us) that it happened to evolve from > It could (with luck) be programmed (somehow) or evolved > (somehow) to respect our laws, private property, and so on. > As soon as it's able to change its own code, it will be literally > unpredictable. I agree with all of this, Lee. This is a very mature thread -- been discussed often before. We're familiar with the soft takeoff and the hard takeoff, the rapid self-optimization of the beastie in charge of its own code, and he consequent very very (though difficult to put a number to) rapid progression to "transcendent' being and singularity. I recognize that this implies so vast a degree of "superiority" relative to our pitifully primitive form of intelligence that the relationship is often compared to the humans-to-bacteria relationship. While this is all quite reasonable, my points are:(1) y'all folks are jumping way ahead and glossing over the fact that it will be a process. Granted that at some point it may be a very very fast process, so fast perhaps that in human terms it will be almost instantaneous, but... In the beginning it will be slower. I liken it to raising a child. An alien child perhaps. And whatever the fundamental nature of intelligence is, we, as humans, building the thing and then training it, we will have only one model of intelligence to work from: and that is intelligence as we know it: intelligence in humans. I mean, how do you design something to be kuflopnik if you don't know what kuflopnik is? So I say let us be clear: by AI or AGI, or SI what we really mean is AHI, AGHI, or SHI, because there is no known form of I without the H (for "human"). I invite an alternate view. That said, I get to point #2. Everything arises out of process and bears the imprint of its origins. The origin of this artificial intelligence, no matter how transcendent, will be a human one. Not biological, but cultural and intellectual. (Even our own prokaryotic bacterial origins are extant in our eukaryotic human cells, and the legacy of the most ancient somatic "motivations" are the foundation of our own somatic "motivations".) I cannot see how you get to the intelligence necessary to effect self-optimization -- a necessary precondition for the fast takeoff -- without a much slower prologue of developing, building, and training, all of which is done using a human model of intelligence and a "curriculum" of human knowledge/culture/values conveyed by the various forms of human media. The "We're doomed!" crowd blow right past the impact of origins and process, take the easy way out by saying "It's all beyond predictability." and end up at a fear-driven, classically irrational, classically human conclusion. Maybe we are doomed. I don't know. But until someone addresses these points, I remain unconvinced. > > [Alex wrote] > > >> Expecting It to adhere to these moral codes would be > >> akin to you or I adhering to the moral codes of Ants. > > > > Too big a jump, at least for the first generation AI. > > But the "first generation" may not last very long at all. Granted, but versions 0.1 to 0.99 will. > For as > soon as anything is as bright as we are, constant hardware > and software improvements will put it vastly beyond us. > "...as soon as... " Indeed. And just how long and what impact that prologue? ******************************************************** Really great to engage with you again, Lee? Hope all is well with you. Best, Jeff Davis Aspiring Transhuman / Delusional Ape (Take your pick) Nicq MacDonald From pjmanney at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 20:40:11 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 12:40:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <29666bf30803061240q146d4070jd2921d965ffe7f3a@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:04 AM, Amara Graps wrote: > The nine months I spent last year writing government grant proposals > wasn't for nothing, this morning I learned that my last NASA proposal > will be funded (a small project: 4 months per year for two years). This > is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. WOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XO, PJ From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 6 21:44:22 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:44:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator Message-ID: ben: >or did you mean "principal investigator"? Oops! Yes. Fortunately, I didn't make that mistake in my proposal. Thanks for the correction. And I should qualify the above: This is my first *accepted* research proposal where I'm the 'principal investigator'. (I submitted three PI proposals prior to that one, which were rejected ... ;- ) Thanks for the congratulations, Ben and PJ. I intend to celebrate. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 6 21:51:51 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:51:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: <04cd01c87f42$81862380$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47D06777.20707@lightlink.com> Jeff Davis wrote: > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > >> How can you "conclude" what a General Artificial Intelligence >> (AGI) will think about humanity? But the danger that Robert >> Bradbury, who started this thread, sees is that once it's at >> human level intelligence, it will quickly go beyond, and >> be utterly unpredictable. If it is a lot smarter than we are, >> there is no telling what it might think. >> >> It could be singularly selfish. >> It could just go crazy and "tile the world with paperclips". >> It could be transcendentally idealistic and want to greatly >> further intelligence in the universe and, oh, wipe out the pesky >> insignificant bacteria (us) that it happened to evolve from >> It could (with luck) be programmed (somehow) or evolved >> (somehow) to respect our laws, private property, and so on. >> As soon as it's able to change its own code, it will be literally >> unpredictable. > > I agree with all of this, Lee. This is a very mature thread -- been > discussed often before. We're familiar with the soft takeoff and the > hard takeoff, the rapid self-optimization of the beastie in charge of > its own code, and he consequent very very (though difficult to put a > number to) rapid progression to "transcendent' being and singularity. > I recognize that this implies so vast a degree of "superiority" > relative to our pitifully primitive form of intelligence that the > relationship is often compared to the humans-to-bacteria relationship. This line of argument makes the following assumption: *** Any AGI sufficiently intelligent to be a threat would start off in such a state that its drive system (its motivations or goals, to speak loosely) would either be unknowable by us, or deliberately programmed to be malicious, or so unstable that they would quickly deviate from heir initial set. This assumption is massively dependant on the actual design of the AGI itself. Nobody can state that an AGI would behave in this or that way without being very specific about the design of the AGI they are talking about. The problem is that many people assume a design for the AGI's motivation system that is theoretically untenable. To be blunt, it just won't work. There are a variety of reasons why it won't work, but regardless of what those reasons actually are, the subject of any discussion of what an AGI "would" do has to be a discussion of its motivation-system design. By contrast, most discussions I have seen are driven by wild, unsupported assertions about what an AGI would do! Either that, or they contain assertions about ideas that are supposed to be real threats (see the list above) which are actually trivially easy to avoid or deeply unlikely. I think you would agree that it does not matter how many times the thread has been discussed, if all that has been said is built on assumptions that have to be thrown out. Richard Loosemore From xuenay at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 21:56:49 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:56:49 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: <6a13bb8f0803021103w2da4df0ey2deea6798199ade3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803061356m27576833hacedbe41645ac2df@mail.gmail.com> On 3/3/08, Robert Bradbury wrote: > On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Kaj Sotala wrote: > > The AGI can come up with ways for us to voluntarily upgrade into a > > posthuman species. Then we won't become obsolete. > > > > > Kaj, please allow me to assume you have a young mind. And you can assume a > transition to a posthuman state. Which may be fine for you -- I don't know. > > The problem is what happens to those of us who choose not to upgrade? Robert, well, if we assume an AGI that is capable of creating a method of upgrading people, then surely it will be smart enough to also arrange a way for people to keep on living their normal lives. You say that the existence of normals would be "pointless" after an AGI would be developed. I do not see the reason for this. If there are people who'd rather not upgrade, then continued baseline existence apparently has a value for them. If I'm not mistaken, this is the "if all of the problems in the world would be solved, what would be point in existing" argument, isn't it? I have never been able to understand that argument - certainly my standard of living is in no way improved by the fact that there are starving children in Africa, and it wouldn't be worsened if that problem was solved. I'm already living in a wealthy Western country - if all the global problems in the world were solved, the effect to my daily life would be almost none. Newspaper headlines would probably get less depressing, though. Likewise, just because there exist beings more intelligent than us doesn't make continued existence as a baseline being pointless. Such beings existing wouldn't mean that good food wouldn't still be a pleasure, that love wouldn't be worth pursuing, or that an evening spent playing games with good friends wouldn't be worthwhile anymore. > What happens to those 6 billion or more humans (a good 5 billion or more of > completely unaware of the forthcoming transition). I.e. those who have not > read Nanosystems or Nanomedicine VI or "The consequences of the development" > of an AGI, which has not been written yet? They can be brought up to date and allowed to make their choice. -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 22:50:12 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 16:50:12 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Can the pope stop technological self-transformation? In-Reply-To: <47D001C2.90302@yahoo.it> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291849.04618.kanzure@gmail.com> <47D001C2.90302@yahoo.it> Message-ID: <200803061650.12418.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Mirco Romanato wrote: > Bryan Bishop ha scritto: > > On Friday 29 February 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, > > > > they don't have massive research institutions, they don't have > > > > neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a > > > > widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to > > > > do with transhumanism? > > > > > > Uh oh. Have you never heard of Stalin's famous contemptuous taunt: > > > "How many divisions does the Pope have?" > > > > No, I hadn't, but what difference does it make how many the Pope > > has? > > The answer is "He has none, but he can take ours." (the Poles, the > Ukrainians....). Ours are of the mind and our own bodies. Tell me, can he take our minds? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 23:09:17 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:09:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Societal coherency and AGI vs. Internal coherency and AGI In-Reply-To: References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <47D03614.4080205@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <200803061709.17992.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > Welcome to my club. ? ?That we each operate within our own > model of 'reality', interpreting the world around us within contexts > only partially overlapping, should (in the moral sense) inspire us to > cooperate in creating an increasingly coherent, increasing > encompassing model, rather than determinedly defending our models as > if they were ourselves. It is interesting that I too come to the same conclusion of create/use rather than preservation but through a different path. I wouldn't say that "partially overlapping contexts" should inspire us to cooperate. After all, we may not all have the same internal meaning, each of us tends to receive inspiration differently. That sounds like a top-down approach from looking at the status of society etc. And while that does show an arrow of increasing societal coherency, what about internal coherency leading to that conclusion to create? Of course, Jef, your response was wrt Richard's socio observation, yes, but perhaps this highlights a potential argument against public debate on these topics? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 23:35:51 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:35:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Devastated ideologies (was: italian politics as exi-chat subject) In-Reply-To: <001301c87fc0$8a880ec0$e2bc1f97@archimede> References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> <052e01c87faa$46645ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001301c87fc0$8a880ec0$e2bc1f97@archimede> Message-ID: <200803061735.51526.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, scerir wrote: > Giorgio Israel (great supporter of Pope Ratzinger, > and well known mathematician of Rome university > 'La Sapienza') published a book ( you can see > the cover here http://gisrael.blogspot.com/ ) > in which he explains how both wings (left and right) > of our political scenario try to make up their > devastated ideologies with neo-scientism and technophilia. My first thought: this technophilia has exhibited itself here before and on wta-talk in the sense of anti-"let's just do it" tendencies. Somebody was laughing at me the other day for suggesting that we build teh tech. Odd. Another thought that I would like to add, from my general observations on the state of those ideologies and the "old world". The status quo takes a lot of time to update. Lots and lots of time. The opportunity to update a unit relaying the status quo is rare, so old information is always being propagated throughout society while the freshest and newest information has to find its own context to keep alive (and that's fine). But on the other hand, we have significantly large organizations ("Left" and "Right") and ideologies still propagating and still abducting new minds even though there's no real power that is necessarily making news releases to gain eyes and get possible neophytes to convert (peculiar). Today I was sitting in a psych class that was talking about 'developmental psychology', going over the theories of Piaget and the like, staged versus continuous development, emotional taxonomies and whatever else. The designs of the studies were simply wrong -- *no*, you _don't_ do longitudinal studies or cross-section studies, not at all -- that's studying a mystical 'normal' brain and the normal status quo does not necessarily represent something that is within the possibility space of the construction or growth of the human brain, it's not psychology at all (perhaps social studies, but only on a "pop" level, since real social studying would involve more, you know, hard (read: real) studying). And the theories of, say, Maslow, were developed so as to promote a more 'humanist' idealization versus the other negative images of humans at the time and while there's nothing necessarily wrong with his ideas, they are not as intense as they could be. And what about marxism? Or libertarianism? Republicanism? Capitalism? Objectivism (cringe)? These are archaic, in more than a sense than "they are old" but that they do not fall into any particular coherency when, on the contrary, it seems that many historical figures were 'fighting' for coherency. So this idea of coherency (sometimes poorly guided, but if one is careful it can be a powerful tool, yes) and defending our own ideologies does not necessarily help the general situation at all ... perhaps instead we should be working on the art of self-creation, design of new ideas and societies from the ground up, integrating and sharing novelty from where ever it may come from. But it seems that one must have their own internal journey of personal growth and development to come to this conclusion, to some extent isolated from society. Maybe we can propose some solutions to the Keepers of the Devastated Ideologies in an attempt to minimize their damage while seemingly maximizing their missions? Or alternatively start teaching parents how to help minimize the damage of society on their children as they grow up and prepare for the future ("the future is now / the singularity is now"). > The above may have something to do with those > current threads here (Italy and transhumanism). ? Definitely. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 23:38:04 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:38:04 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <052101c87fa8$2ba3fda0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <052101c87fa8$2ba3fda0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803061738.04494.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Alex wrote: > > Those aside for now. But until we understand both the chemistry > > and the wetware, I think it would be safe to reason that any > > uploads would be no where near as 'human' as we would like. Identity is something that is hard to pin down, and the price of uploading may very well be 'identity', and as much as you try to show one now, identity and thermodynamics and reality just don't really work like that, so perhaps it is a good thing that you come to the conclusion that uploads will not be 'human'. ;) - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 00:36:49 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 18:36:49 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803020746i1f70e497u8bbedafdd7d9ef3b@mail.gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803011724.38240.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803020746i1f70e497u8bbedafdd7d9ef3b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803061836.49412.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 02 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > Bryan Bishop wrote: > > Just to make sure, you do understand that I am not dismissive of > > religions at all, merely in terms of making "transhumanism" a > > reality, such as making futurist technologies realized, since *not* > > paying attention to religion does not influence the bottomline > > technicality of the technologies involved. Otherwise, it's an > > amazing cultural phenomena and much more. > > Not paying attention to religion may not influence the > bottomline *technicality* of a technology. But in terms of the > actual *successful development* of a technology, you need generally a Successful development means making it happen, yes? Making it happen is mostly figuring out how to make it work in the given context, like where to get the materials, how to put them together, etc. > combination of political, corporate, academic and financial support. That's because of the subjective variation of 'success'. Otherwise, you don't need that combination at all: you just need to make it happen. > The "amazing cultural phenomena" you describe, if it turns against > you (stem cell research vrs. the Bush Administration, for instance), > results in a definite slowing or stopping of potentially life saving > medical technology. The only way they can do that is by jailing us in prisons. > And even though the research and development would continue in other > nations, the U.S. would then be at a serious disadvantage to be a > leader in the biotech field and reap the financial harvest. And > remember that it's just plain "un-American" to not make tons of money > and dominate technological progress! lol Heh, well, with self-replication there might be a collapse of the financial institutions, but not if they play their cards right. So that's something that somebody might want to put some thought into. > you continue: > > No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility does > > not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they can > > protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to burn us > > alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over the > > internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It will route > > around the damage. > > But warring against research labs and those who fund them in another > matter, entirely. It generally takes serious money and disciplined > scientific teams to tease out Mother Nature's secrets. Nah, it just takes discipline. That's the whole discipline of science. It does not take money, but rather the raw resources. The guys that build particle accelerators and energy stations? They had the discipline to make it happen even when there wasn't necessarily a "plutonium economy" or "electricity economy" when they started off. > I think part of the problem may be that highschool chemistry teaching > has fallen into such disrepair. "Oh, no, we can't trust the kids to > not blow themselves up!" lol In chemistry people learn the joy of > scientific investigation. That's certainly true in my local case, but in general the electronics revolutions occured even without high tech electronics labs in high school, so I think it might be something different. I was using high school mostly to refer to age. > of global competitiveness. And by the time we try to really turn > things around we may have lost some critical advantages that might > never be fully regained. Maybe. Can you own an advantage, even in natural-evolutionary terms? > In terms of national security (and economic strength is a foundation > of military strength) and a having a powerful and effective armed > forces, the U.S. in my view needs to be much more careful in terms of > who does scientific research in our labs and who can gain access to > our technological trade secrets. I think we should only let in > foreign nationals that are from nations which do not have longterm > plans to take our spot as the definitive world superpower. I cringe > to think of all the knowledge & power which is leaked out to > potentially hostile foreign competitors because we are so dependent > on researchers not from our native country. What knowledge and power? What does the military have that cannot be already duplicated? Airplanes? Easily duplicated (though not necessarily the money to make many tests. This is of course a matter of resources, not money.) Nuclear weapons? Non-military persons came up with nukes. Navy machinery? Easy enough. > We are in a race to develop whatever the next generation of > technological innovations are that we must have to stay not just > competitive, but ahead of the rest of the world. And yes, we do have This is FUD. > our top secret military labs that surely have incredible security and > well vetted researchers, but the tech that feeds those places comes > generally from corporate and academic America. It will be carefully > nurtured and protected technological progress that will maintain our > economic strength, and this must be protected every bit as much as > some state of the art new weapons system. Fud, fud, fud. > Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can cause It is also more fud. > healthy competition among developed nations to make rapid progress in > key technologies that would potentially change our lives for the > better. I am very grateful for this (would you want a powerful world > government that had a negative view of biotech research and passed > laws in effect *everywhere* to enforce their stance?, lol) But on > the other hand, nationalism can cause extreme over-competitiveness, > which leads to wars, both cold and hot. Btw, I apologize for not getting back to this soon enough. I forgot about it. :) - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From ABlainey at aol.com Fri Mar 7 00:34:21 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:34:21 EST Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: In a message dated 06/03/2008 21:55:36 GMT Standard Time, rpwl at lightlink.com writes: > This line of argument makes the following assumption: > > *** Any AGI sufficiently intelligent to be a threat would start off > in such a state that its drive system (its motivations or goals, to > speak loosely) would either be unknowable by us, or deliberately > programmed to be malicious, or so unstable that they would quickly > deviate from heir initial set. > Unknowable by us, most probable. We would have to control each and every piece of data it receives and calculate every reaction to that data in order to know with certainty its motivations (motivation in these terms, logically determined actions in my terms). A mathematically insurmountable task. Deliberately malicious. I don't agree that this would need to be so. If anything this is a concern that is a possibility. Hackers are generally new adopters of all technology and such juvenile tinkering could well result in deliberately malicious programming or simply through pure ignorance, derailing a friendly AI. I don't need to highlight the possible military implications regarding desirability of a malicious AI. Unstable may not be the clearest term I would use. Certainly unstable from our point of view, but more probably the learning curve of the AI would be so stochastic that we cannot calculate the outcome. This would be true of its learned logic, knowledge base and any psydo-emotions which it may have. The end result is a chaotic erratic system (from our eyes) which would be impossible to predict. > This assumption is massively dependant on the actual design of the AGI > itself. Nobody can state that an AGI would behave in this or that way > without being very specific about the design of the AGI they are talking > about. > Agreed, as per above. > The problem is that many people assume a design for the AGI's motivation > system that is theoretically untenable. To be blunt, it just won't > work. There are a variety of reasons why it won't work, but regardless > of what those reasons actually are, the subject of any discussion of > what an AGI "would" do has to be a discussion of its motivation-system > design. > > By contrast, most discussions I have seen are driven by wild, > unsupported assertions about what an AGI would do! Either that, or they > contain assertions about ideas that are supposed to be real threats (see > the list above) which are actually trivially easy to avoid or deeply > unlikely. > Pointing back to my earlier post I stated: An Intelligence of this magnitude with a global reach into just about every control system on the planet could and probably will do major damage. Although probably not through design or desire, but just through exploration of ability or pure accident. Even if the AGI were boxed in or only had limited external contact, I can't imagine how we could keep it cooped up for very long. I can't see how you can reduce the list of threats to 'Trivial.' How do you propose we 'easily' avoid them? Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 00:55:31 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 11:55:31 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <200803061738.04494.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <052101c87fa8$2ba3fda0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803061738.04494.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 07/03/2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: > Identity is something that is hard to pin down, and the price of > uploading may very well be 'identity', and as much as you try to show > one now, identity and thermodynamics and reality just don't really work > like that, so perhaps it is a good thing that you come to the > conclusion that uploads will not be 'human'. ;) How do you know that the price of surviving from one day to the next isn't loss of identity? -- Stathis Papaioannou From ABlainey at aol.com Fri Mar 7 00:56:46 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:56:46 EST Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties Message-ID: In a message dated 06/03/2008 23:39:02 GMT Standard Time, kanzure at gmail.com writes: > On Thursday 06 March 2008, Alex wrote: > > > Those aside for now. But until we understand both the chemistry > > > and the wetware, I think it would be safe to reason that any > > > uploads would be no where near as 'human' as we would like. > > Identity is something that is hard to pin down, and the price of > uploading may very well be 'identity', and as much as you try to show > one now, identity and thermodynamics and reality just don't really work > like that, so perhaps it is a good thing that you come to the > conclusion that uploads will not be 'human'. ;) > > - Bryan > Exactly, It's a worry (short term). Is the cost of immortality loosing our identity and humanity? Perhaps the first generation of uploads will be nothing more than, emotionless, driveless, cold logic beings. I imagine this would be fine for many beurocrats ;o) But even if this is the case, Long term I don't think it would stop us getting the system right eventually and upgrading said cold thinkers. Either way it beats the alternative: guaranteed wormwood. Following on. It is foreseeable that we will be able to replicate the bodies' hardware and hopefully with that, the memories, etc. of the subject. Perhaps if the emotional side or chemistry side were not easily achievable. That would not stop our ability to put uploads in cold storage if desirable. The equivalent of Cryo for uploads until we iron out the kinks. Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 23:50:36 2008 From: giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com (giancarlos) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:50:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof References: <580930c20803060853i397b87a5hba05d0b6ac599f84@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00f801c87fe4$e16283a0$37effea9@casac679d9543b> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stefano Vaj" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:53 PM Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof > On the other hands my partners, > namely those in charge with the firm's own legal representationare not > really happy, irrespective of what they may think of my > extra-curricular activities, that somebody may think it funny, for the > sake of my moral assassination, to have the firm described on the Web > as a business cover for a band of lunatics of dubious political > affiliations, Well, actually I think nobody accused your law firm to be the "business cover for a band of lunatics of dubious political affiliations". On the contrary, I perfectly understand that you want to hold carefully separate Mr. Vaj's embarassing political leanings from Dr. S.'s professional life. In the same way - as I'm a lawyer too - I can understand that your partners "are not really happy" and asked Fabio to remove the post from his blog in order to preserve the law firm "good name". That said, I cannot get out of noticing that: 1) your partners, besides asking Fabio to remove his post, should also ask you to make your presence on the web more cautious and discreet, because - as I already said in another post - if you perform a google search ("Stefano Vaj") you will find plenty of questionable and embarassing query results, which could undoubtedly represents a serious damage for your law firm (and they're not written by Fabio!). 2) if even your law firm feels embarassed for its managing partner "parallel identity", maybe one might at least ask if also the AIT (Italian Transhumanist Association) - and consequently the WTA, and maybe the whole transhumanism - could suffer a serious damage, isn't it? But think Giulio should ask this question, considered that he's one of the AIT protectors. Regarding your law firm SS logo (and the very nice - although a bit pompous - german military march in the background), actually I consider it just folklore, something you did on a whim, and at the most just one of the pieces of the puzzle, which needs to be interpreted systematically, together with the much more relevant elements I provided in my previous post (see http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2008-March/041398.html). By the way, thank you to Lee Corbin who correctly pointed out that "an ad hominem argument consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim". Well, in that post I think I provided a lot of "factual claims" regarding your thoughts (with accurate references to books, texts and websites), while I didn't attack you personally and never mentioned your real name or your SS logo (which - as I said - I consider just a minor clue). On the contrary, you replied just saying that I'm a "troll" (and now that I'm a "psychopath"), as a means of avoiding discussion of the relevance or truthfulness of my claims and statements. That said, everybody can arise an opinion about who used "ad hominem arguments". Giancarlo http://www.linkedin.com/in/stile From spaecious at gmail.com Thu Mar 6 07:43:41 2008 From: spaecious at gmail.com (j.k.) Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:43:41 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Today's OED Word of the Day: Post-Human Message-ID: <47CFA0AD.2030705@gmail.com> I always find it interesting to see what the OED makes of a word. Today's word of the day was post-human: http://www.oed.com/cgi/display/30007374?rss=1 From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 02:51:05 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:51:05 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: References: <200803061738.04494.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803062051.05733.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On 07/03/2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > Identity is something that is hard to pin down, and the price of > > ?uploading may very well be 'identity', and as much as you try to > > show one now, identity and thermodynamics and reality just don't > > really work like that, so perhaps it is a good thing that you come > > to the conclusion that uploads will not be 'human'. ;) > > How do you know that the price of surviving from one day to the next > isn't loss of identity? I don't think I asserted that I did. :) - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 02:52:28 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:52:28 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200803062052.28803.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, ABlainey at aol.com wrote: > Exactly, It's a worry (short term). Is the cost of immortality > loosing our identity and humanity? Please don't take that to be my meaning. Stathis' message clarifies it. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 7 02:56:36 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:56:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47D0AEE4.9090705@lightlink.com> ABlainey at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 06/03/2008 21:55:36 GMT Standard Time, > rpwl at lightlink.com writes: > > >> This line of argument makes the following assumption: >> >> *** Any AGI sufficiently intelligent to be a threat would start off >> in such a state that its drive system (its motivations or goals, to >> speak loosely) would either be unknowable by us, or deliberately >> programmed to be malicious, or so unstable that they would quickly >> deviate from heir initial set. > > > Unknowable by us, most probable. We would have to control each and every > piece of data it receives and calculate every reaction to that data in > order to know with certainty its motivations (motivation in these terms, > logically determined actions in my terms). A mathematically > insurmountable task. > Deliberately malicious. I don't agree that this would need to be so. If > anything this is a concern that _is_ a possibility. Hackers are > generally new adopters of all technology and such juvenile tinkering > could well result in deliberately malicious programming or simply > through pure ignorance, derailing a friendly AI. I don't need to > highlight the possible military implications regarding desirability of a > malicious AI. > Unstable may not be the clearest term I would use. Certainly unstable > from our point of view, but more probably the learning curve of the AI > would be so stochastic that we cannot calculate the outcome. This would > be true of its learned logic, knowledge base and any psydo-emotions > which it may have. The end result is a chaotic erratic system (from our > eyes) which would be impossible to predict. > >> This assumption is massively dependant on the actual design of the AGI >> itself. Nobody can state that an AGI would behave in this or that way >> without being very specific about the design of the AGI they are talking >> about. > > > Agreed, as per above. > >> The problem is that many people assume a design for the AGI's motivation >> system that is theoretically untenable. To be blunt, it just won't >> work. There are a variety of reasons why it won't work, but regardless >> of what those reasons actually are, the subject of any discussion of >> what an AGI "would" do has to be a discussion of its motivation-system >> design. >> >> By contrast, most discussions I have seen are driven by wild, >> unsupported assertions about what an AGI would do! Either that, or they >> contain assertions about ideas that are supposed to be real threats (see >> the list above) which are actually trivially easy to avoid or deeply >> unlikely. > > > Pointing back to my earlier post I stated: > /An Intelligence of this magnitude with a global reach into just about > every control system on the planet could and probably will do major > damage. Although probably not through design or desire, but just through > exploration of ability or pure accident. > /Even if the AGI were boxed in or only had limited external contact, I > can't imagine how we could keep it cooped up for very long. > > I can't see how you can reduce the list of threats to '/Trivial.'/ How > do you propose we 'easily' avoid them? / Unfortunately, I think I was not clear enough, and as a result you have misunderstood what I said in rather a substantial way. When you build an AGI, you *must* sort out the motivation mechanism ahead of time, or the machine will simply not work at all. You don't build an AGI and *then* discover what its motivation is. If you do not understand the motivation system before you build it, then it will not work, as simple as that. The reason why many people do talk as if a future AGI will have a "surprise" motivation system is that today's AI systems are driven by extremely crude and non-scalable "goal-stack" control systems, which are great for narrow-AI planning tasks, but which become extremely unstable when we imagine using them in a full-blown AGI. But when people imagine an extended form of goal-stack drive system controlling a future AGI, they fail to realise that the very same instability that makes the AGI seem so threatening will also make it so unstable that it will never actually become generally intelligent. The bottom line: you cannot make statements like "An ...[AGI]... could and probably will do major damage", because there is no "probably" about it. You either set out to make it do damage and be intelligent at the same time (an extremely difficult combination, in practice, for reasons I have explained elsewhere), or you don't! There is no surprise. For someone to talk about discovering an AGI's motivation after the fact would be like a company building a supersonic passenger jet and then speculating about whether the best way to fly it is nose-forward or nose-backward. Richard Loosemore From max at maxmore.com Fri Mar 7 02:54:45 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:54:45 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Department of Strategic Philosophy Professor Max More Course 510: Extropic Myth Analysis Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. Essays may be of any length and in any format (but legible please--I have to read and grade a dozen of these things). Any student deserving an A grade on this assignment will immediately receive a full Ph.D. If you have any doubts about your brilliant ideas, I am available during my unusual office hours. Dr. More Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 03:11:55 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:11:55 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The AGI and limiting it References: <715569.24356.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><04bf01c87f3e$fec51d50$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D00B59.4090601@lightlink.com> <053301c87fad$174114b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47D02E7F.3010000@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <056801c88001$55f4d350$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Richard writes >> Sorry, but quite a number of us have found those arguments to be >> very convincing, though, of course by no means the final word. > > Arguments always look convincing when not subjected to skeptical > challenge. Aristotle got a lot of mileage that way. Oh, there has been a lot of give and take here on these subjects and on the other list I peruse about this, namely SL4. So I would say that arguments have been subject---and are continuing to be subject---to criticism. Please understand that when some of us here have found certain arguments to be convincing, it hardly means that we failed to notice dissent. My error was failing to mention the existence of that dissent, and so I'm glad you reminded us of it. > Those with a scientific attitude should discuss these issues by looking > at the arguments involved in a dispassionate manner. Obviously, though, being human, people cannot be expected, nor can any scientist be expected, to be entirely dispassionate. The important thing is to try to listen with an open mind, but that's easier said than done. > I have found that on the AGI and Singularity lists people often do > exactly that. There is sometimes vigorous disagreement, but for the > most part this disagreement is about the issues themselves, not about > the personalities. > > By contrast, I found that elsewhere, as in your comment above, the > common response is to say that *because* a majority of people on SL4 or > on the Extropian list take a dim view of these alternative ideas about > the friendliness problem, therefore this majority vote counts as some > kind of argument. That in itself, you are right, is no argument at all. But, especially for people with limited time, such facts must weigh their probabilities of which side is correct. I myself hold a very unusual view regarding black holes, and I have argued at length about it on sci.relativity. But then it turns out that Michael Price also, later, argued my same points. And all along, I found, there were a few well-established and respected physicists who agreed with us. Nonetheless, often I do admit to people that my view is very much the minority one (doubtless more of a minority than your position is, though). >>> Some of those people who have thought about it for years and years and >>> years were invited to discuss these issues in greater depth, and examine >>> the disputed assumptions. The result? They mounted a vitriolic >>> campaign of personal abuse against those who wanted to suggest that >>> Eliezer might not be right, and banned them from the SL4 mailing list. >> >> I.e., you got banned. How many other people were banned from that list >> simply because they disagreed with the majority? > > The phrasing of this question is a little insidious: you clearly imply > that the banning was the result of simply disagreeing with the majority. I have just your description of "a vitriolic campaign of personal abuse". Doubtless there is another side to the story, there always is. > Clever. It changes the subject of discussion from "The destructive > consequences that ensued when someone tried to get an alternative point > of view about friendliness discussed on SL4" What? But now *you* are the one going back to the idea that the banning resulted from disagreeing (with the majority). >... to the highly personalized topic of why *I* in particular was banned from SL4. So I made the jump that you're being banned resulted from someone (i.e. you) trying to get an alternative view discussed. Was that the reason or wasn't it? And from your immediately following email: > On reflection, Lee, perhaps I am being a little too testy on this > matter. ;-) Really, that's perfectly understandable. I may very well be taking you to task over matters I don't know enough about. Moreover, given, as you say > I have been fighting against a particularly frustrating sequence of > discussions, on the other lists, where statements are being paraded as > facts when they are actually deeply implausible assertions. Yeah, well I do appreciate your corrections of at least one of the "facts" I presented, and I apologized, hopefully to your satisfaction. > So perhaps I am seeing that everywhere right now. Thanks for the constructive attitude, Richard. Who is the active email poster that does not overreact too much? Certainly not I. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 03:51:18 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:51:18 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <04cd01c87f42$81862380$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <057f01c88006$f1c926f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jeff writes >> It could be singularly selfish. >> It could just go crazy and "tile the world with paperclips". >> It could be transcendentally idealistic and want to greatly >> further intelligence in the universe and, oh, wipe out the pesky >> insignificant bacteria (us) that it happened to evolve from >> It could (with luck) be programmed (somehow) or evolved >> (somehow) to respect our laws, private property, and so on. >> As soon as it's able to change its own code, it will be literally >> unpredictable. > > I agree with all of this, Lee. This is a very mature thread -- been > discussed often before. Yes, sorry. > We're familiar with the soft takeoff and the > hard takeoff, the rapid self-optimization of the beastie in charge of > its own code, and he consequent very very (though difficult to put a > number to) rapid progression to "transcendent' being and singularity.... Yes, > While this is all quite reasonable, my points are:(1) y'all folks are > jumping way ahead and glossing over the fact that it will be a > process. Granted that at some point it may be a very very fast > process, so fast perhaps that in human terms it will be almost > instantaneous, but... In the beginning it will be slower. Like right now. The "doom and gloom crowd" are focused on a longer time window, and even I, who am not one of them, believe that the likelihood of further existence of recognizable human beings (uploaded or not) is fifty percent or less over the next century. And near zero for those for non-uploaded people and people not running on what we call computer hardware today. > I liken it to raising a child. An alien child perhaps. And whatever the > fundamental nature of intelligence is, we, as humans, building the > thing and then training it, we will have only one model of > intelligence to work from: and that is intelligence as we know it: > intelligence in humans. I mean, how do you design something to be > kuflopnik if you don't know what kuflopnik is? So I say let us be > clear: by AI or AGI, or SI what we really mean is AHI, AGHI, or SHI, > because there is no known form of I without the H (for "human"). I > invite an alternate view. Here goes. The various kinds of researches and approaches going on right now, in my opinion, could result in a distinctly non-human kind of thinking, especially in the realm of its goals. (I doubt if anything can be considered an intelligence if it behaves as though it has no goals. A goal could be as simple, for example, as wanting to answer a question.) But, like you, I invite alternative views. > I cannot see how you get to the intelligence necessary to effect self- > optimization -- a necessary precondition for the fast takeoff -- without > a much slower prologue of developing, building, and training, all of > which is done using a human model of intelligence and a "curriculum" of human > knowledge/culture/values conveyed by the various forms of human media. I find all of that plausible except that you say it's really likely to absorb our culture and values. Even many fully human children grow up repudiating almost all of the values they were trained to acquire and which were surrounding them the whole time. An "inhuman" machine could be far, far less impressionable. > The "We're doomed!" crowd blow right past the impact of origins and > process, take the easy way out by saying "It's all beyond > predictability" Heh, heh, :-) I accuse them of *not* recognizing that it's all beyond predictability! They seem to act as though it's a done deal, and that despair is our only recourse. I assume that they're not so silly as to think that they can successfully appeal to folks worldwide to just stop working on it! > and end up at a fear-driven, classically irrational, > classically human conclusion. > > Maybe we are doomed. I don't know. But until someone addresses these > points, I remain unconvinced. To be totally convinced of future outcomes is to possess way, way too much self-confidence. My own bravest claim, given that, is that I see a 99% chance that 200 years from now (or a lot less) biological humanity will be extinct (or uploaded). So I'm a bit of a hypocrite too. >> For as soon as anything is as bright as we are, constant hardware >> and software improvements will put it vastly beyond us. > > "...as soon as... " > > Indeed. And just how long and what impact that prologue? I hope that not too big a component of the disagreements we're having about this on the list the last few days boils down simply to a miscommunication of time estimates. I find Ray Kurzweil's estimates of singularity in 2045 a little bit too soon, but that's just my gut speaking. But I don't think it will be very much longer after that, perhaps a decade or two.[1] > ******************************************************** > Really great to engage with you again, Lee? That's for sure. It's great to see you back. > Hope all is well with you. Thanks, and same to you. Lee > Best, Jeff Davis > > Aspiring Transhuman / Delusional Ape > (Take your pick) > Nicq MacDonald > From sentience at pobox.com Fri Mar 7 04:02:44 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:02:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <47D0BE64.8030408@pobox.com> Max More wrote: > Department of Strategic Philosophy > Professor Max More > Course 510: Extropic Myth Analysis > > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. > > Essays may be of any length and in any format (but legible please--I > have to read and grade a dozen of these things). > > Any student deserving an A grade on this assignment will immediately > receive a full Ph.D. Damn, I wish that was serious. BTW, http://www.maxmore.com/speaking.htm shows a 404. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Fri Mar 7 03:37:41 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:37:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Max More wrote: Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. I'm guessing the PhD thing is a joke, but I wrote the following in a blog entry a while back: "...in the real world, there is not so clear of a relationship between sacrifice and heroism as there is in story; in real life, you might very well be able to save both the preschooler and the old lady lying on the railroad tracks. Real life is not a word problem in a law school test book; in real life, we have options, and we can innovate. So while trade-offs are inevitable, the trade-offs we are likely to encounter in our daily existence are not going to be (generally speaking) as clear-cut as what we see in film and literature. In books, there often seems to be a kind of prescience on the part of the heroes; they seem to "know" that their death, if it happens, will end up saving innocents. In reality, on the other hand, there is just as much chance that the would-be hero's "sacrifice" will lead to nothing more than one extra body for the cleanup crew." - Anne --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 04:06:19 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:06:19 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: Message-ID: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Alex and Bryan wrote > [Bryan wrote] > On Thursday 06 March 2008, Alex wrote: > > Those aside for now. But until we understand both the chemistry > > and the wetware, I think it would be safe to reason that any > > uploads would be no where near as 'human' as we would like. > > Identity is something that is hard to pin down, Yes, in some ways it is hard to pin down, e.g., whether a duplicate of you is really you. But the identity in case of uploads is very simple: Either it's as good a you as the you that will be next week, or it isn't. Or next month, whatever. The important point is this: * If a person trying to get uploaded determines through questioning that his uploaded self really seems to be him in all ways, then the upload effort was successful. For example, if we succeed in uploading a sequence of chimpanzees, and their behavior in terms of responses and thoughts (as well as we can determine them) seems identical to the original ape, then we're ready for human trials (IMO). And once a human is successfully uploaded, the proof of the pudding will be that his or her friends find communicating with the upload to be essentially indistinguishable from communicating with the original. Anything that falls short of this is a FAILED UPLOAD attempt. Alex [agreeing with Bryan] writes > Is the cost of immortality losing our identity and humanity? But then, by definition, the immortality has not occurred! Lee From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 04:09:53 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:09:53 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <47D0BE64.8030408@pobox.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <47D0BE64.8030408@pobox.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > Max More wrote: > > Department of Strategic Philosophy > > Professor Max More > > Course 510: Extropic Myth Analysis > > > > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. > > > > Essays may be of any length and in any format (but legible please--I > > have to read and grade a dozen of these things). > > > > Any student deserving an A grade on this assignment will immediately > > receive a full Ph.D. > > Damn, I wish that was serious. In any case, the challenge is worthy, hinging not so much on "heroic", but on "self." Welcome back, Max! - Jef From max at maxmore.com Fri Mar 7 04:17:47 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:17:47 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <47D0BE64.8030408@pobox.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <47D0BE64.8030408@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20080307041747.INZT11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> At 10:02 PM 3/6/2008, you wrote: > > > >BTW, http://www.maxmore.com/speaking.htm shows a 404. Thanks. That URL with an HTML instead of an HTM works, but I'll fix it. Cheers, MM >-- >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.cgi/extropy-chat Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 04:20:38 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:20:38 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <05a501c8800b$2780b0c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Max writes > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. But isn't the near-requirement of self-sacrifice a mid-to-late 20th century degeneration? John C. Wright in an interview says [True] Heroism in literature died at about the same time Nietzsche announced the death of God, or Sartre the death of Reason. Unknown to the mainstream, heroism and reason (as well as the sense of wonder reason inspires), like the sacred river Alpheus, re-emerged from subterranean obscurity in the most unlikely place imaginable: the pages of common rags with names like THRILLING AIR WONDER STORIES. Simplistic and childish at first, scientifiction recaptured the simplicity and child-like innocence the mainstream had lost. Need I remind readers that "innocence" does not mean "naivety"; it means "not guilty"? Mainstream literature of the Twentieth Century is by no means innocent. I can attest that Keith Laumer's heros, for example, did not care much for self-sacrifice, to put it mildly. Wright goes on (see URL below) Modern literature outside of genre writing or historical novels is, of course, ugly rubbish. In this respect I am a snob of Philistinism, proud of my taste in tastelessness: I would rather read Maxwell Grant or World-Wrecker Hamilton than James Joyce. The clean and honest heroism absent from the world-view of modern literature can be found only in genre writing. http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/001978.html (longish, but interesting) I think that Wright would agree with you. Lee > Essays may be of any length and in any format (but legible please--I > have to read and grade a dozen of these things). > > Any student deserving an A grade on this assignment will immediately > receive a full Ph.D. > > If you have any doubts about your brilliant ideas, I am available > during my unusual office hours. > > Dr. More > > Max More, Ph.D. > Strategic Philosopher > www.maxmore.com > max at maxmore.com From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 04:51:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:51:54 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <200803062251.54812.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Max More wrote: > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. The hero is the self, the star character of the story. First person does it best, it is a process. The core element should be self-creation, not self-injury. "Self-creation is the highest art" -- Zindell. Some time ago I came across a document that elaborated upon Leibniz's optimism which found that since reality will always be reality at its best, and will always create to its fullest, and that from moment to moment it will be the best of all possible worlds, the remaining process to maximize is the self, to the fullest potential. I wrote a while back to either SL4 or the AGI mailing list of times when I wonder to what extent the results of my thoughts are creating and defining physics and mathematics, in the spirit of Egan and perhaps Tegmark, less so Plato. In some philosophy, the self (in so much as it can be dissociated from the concept of identity and instead to an art that practices itself) is said to extend and encompass more than just the local meat sack, but instead the world about it, to some extent, as it is just cybernetics and signals, whether matter or energy. So, if you genuinely contribute to the unfolding story by maximizing self, could you not escape the self-sacrifice of the hero myth? No longer is the hero defined on 'chivalry' (see the etymology as presented on Wikipedia), nor is the hero defined on morality and social customs, but instead on the way that the hero approaches reality to maximize self-realization and creation, an artist to the core. Here, the hero does not self-sacrifice or self-injury, but instead becomes specialized, healthy, optimized, a 'citizen' and self-made-master of his arts, meaning creating itself in a growing world, a role model, a 'signal' not only of energy but of matter and substance so purely (internally) meaningful that it serves as a catalyst: the galaxy is a womb for the genesis of gods, no? Wasn't that the basis of the Way of Ringess? That all men and women can become gods? > Essays may be of any length and in any format (but legible please--I > have to read and grade a dozen of these things). I'd rather not. Let's first discuss. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 03:40:46 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:40:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Devastated ideologies (was: italian politics as exi-chat subject) In-Reply-To: <200803061735.51526.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> <052e01c87faa$46645ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001301c87fc0$8a880ec0$e2bc1f97@archimede> <200803061735.51526.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote a very extropic thread of thought: > > My first thought: this technophilia has exhibited itself here before and > on wta-talk in the sense of anti-"let's just do it" tendencies. Did you think "technophobia"? > Somebody was laughing at me the other day for suggesting that we build > teh tech. Odd. Another thought that I would like to add, from my > general observations on the state of those ideologies and the "old > world". The status quo takes a lot of time to update. Lots and lots of > time. But many structures reach the limit of their capacity and quickly collapse, making way for new forms. Think punctuated change, unevenly distributed, but tending to ratchet forward. > The opportunity to update a unit relaying the status quo is rare, > so old information is always being propagated throughout society while > the freshest and newest information has to find its own context to keep > alive (and that's fine). It's awkward when people speak of information (genes or memes) in intentional or teleological terms. But you're emphasizing an important point about memetic inertia and the inherent chaos at the leading edge of change. > But on the other hand, we have significantly > large organizations ("Left" and "Right") and ideologies still > propagating and still abducting new minds even though there's no real > power that is necessarily making news releases to gain eyes and get > possible neophytes to convert (peculiar). Strange statement, considering the obvious and massive power structures within society which seem to be doing just that. > Today I was sitting in a > psych class that was talking about 'developmental psychology', going > over the theories of Piaget and the like, staged versus continuous > development, emotional taxonomies and whatever else. The designs of the > studies were simply wrong -- *no*, you _don't_ do longitudinal studies > or cross-section studies, not at all -- that's studying a > mystical 'normal' brain and the normal status quo does not necessarily > represent something that is within the possibility space of the > construction or growth of the human brain, it's not psychology at all > (perhaps social studies, but only on a "pop" level, since real social > studying would involve more, you know, hard (read: real) studying). I don't understand you particular criticism here, but I think it's significant that sociology and psychology are at the least "scientific" end of the scientific spectrum with biology along with biology not so far down the line. Interestingly, developments in the science of complexity seem likely to make these topics among the most productive in the near future. > And the theories of, say, Maslow, were developed so as to promote a > more 'humanist' idealization versus the other negative images of humans > at the time and while there's nothing necessarily wrong with his ideas, > they are not as intense as they could be. And what about marxism? Or > libertarianism? Republicanism? Capitalism? Objectivism (cringe)? These > are archaic, in more than a sense than "they are old" but that they do > not fall into any particular coherency when, on the contrary, it seems > that many historical figures were 'fighting' for coherency. [Insert Arrow of Morality here, with talk of increasing coherence over an increasing context of values, promoted by increasingly effective (scientific) means...] > So this > idea of coherency (sometimes poorly guided, but if one is careful it > can be a powerful tool, yes) and defending our own ideologies does not > necessarily help the general situation at all Yes, not when defending one's ideologies means narrowing the context of their interpretation. But it bears pointing out here that perceived "purity" has evolved as a strong moral driver. > ... perhaps instead we > should be working on the art of self-creation, design of new ideas and > societies from the ground up, integrating and sharing novelty from > where ever it may come from. Just as all persistent novelty results from evolutionary processes, we would do well to **intentionally** compete within synergistic systems of cooperative growth. Our current position on the evolutionary tree is a result of such processes, but we've just reached the threshold of being able to play the game intentionally. > But it seems that one must have their own > internal journey of personal growth and development to come to this > conclusion, to some extent isolated from society. Diversity is essential to evolutionary growth, accelerating with selection via an increasingly evolved environment. > Maybe we can propose > some solutions to the Keepers of the Devastated Ideologies in an > attempt to minimize their damage while seemingly maximizing their > missions? Or alternatively start teaching parents how to help minimize > the damage of society on their children as they grow up and prepare for > the future ("the future is now / the singularity is now"). My own frustration has to do with the fundamental (information-theoretic) impracticality of conveying larger contexts to smaller systems (if they could decode (decompress) it, then they'd already have the knowledge.) I think the only practical way for us involves intentionally building a supporting framework, or Culture, promoting our evolving values more wisely than could any individual. - Jef From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 05:35:51 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 21:35:51 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Anne Corwin wrote: > Max More wrote: > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. > > I'm guessing the PhD thing is a joke, but I wrote the following in a blog > entry a while back: > > "...in the real world, there is not so clear of a relationship between > sacrifice and heroism as there is in story; in real life, you might very > well be able to save both the preschooler and the old lady lying on the > railroad tracks. > In books, there often seems to be a kind of prescience on the part of the > heroes; they seem to "know" that their death, if it happens, will end up > saving innocents. In reality, on the other hand, there is just as much > chance that the would-be hero's "sacrifice" will lead to nothing more than > one extra body for the cleanup crew." I wish the PhD offer was real. Then I could wave one 'round wit' da rest a youse guys. Anne -- Heroes are prescient of their sacrifice because it triggers an emotional reaction in the reader -- empathy -- in advance of their heroic act. Gets you all warmed up, neurons firing in anticipation for the more satisfying finale when he actually does the deed. Also, life imitates art. The real world event might not have been occurred in a story-worthy fashion, but the doer will remember it as such and retell it so. Lee -- the more you send of John C. Wright's thoughts outside his novels, the more I think I didn't understand what I thought he wrote. I think he's wrong in this case, but I'm not going to write a thesis to prove he's got a chip on his shoulder. It's a waste of time and his own words are enough. He's got to get out more. What I think Max is really asking (and even if it's a joke, tell me if you're not) is how do we reprogram the human brain to fight a million years of evolutionary psychology, where sacrifice (altruism) was a successful strategy which was then reflected in our storytelling. Let's not forget it can still be a successful strategy in our world today, as any story about a soldier in Iraq saving his mates from an IED will demonstrate. (In my mind, my father is retaliating on your behalf by beating me about the head and neck with a rolled up copy of his Objectivist newsletter in one hand and the doorstop of 'Atlas Shrugged' in the other. Lord knows Ayn had issues about sacrifice, too... That's why the book's so damn heavy! This is a joke, BTW -- Dad never laid a hand on me.) Most importantly, the hero should be reconceptualized through a redefinition of 'self' and of 'sacrifice', not by the removal of either, or you will suffer from a story about which the audience couldn't give a tinker's damn, having neither an empathetic protagonist, nor stakes to worry about. We don't need to rewrite the myths from whole cloth. If we did, they wouldn't work as well. We merely need to rejig them to our purposes. PJ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 05:56:47 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 21:56:47 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com><417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ Manney writes > Most importantly, the hero should be reconceptualized through a > redefinition of 'self' and of 'sacrifice', not by the removal of > either, or you will suffer from a story about which the audience > couldn't give a tinker's damn, having neither an empathetic > protagonist, nor stakes to worry about. We don't need to rewrite the > myths from whole cloth. If we did, they wouldn't work as well. We > merely need to rejig them to our purposes. It sounds as though you've received the full blast of the anti-sacrifice meme from your father and Ayn Rand. But seriously, why does heroic conduct have to include self-sacrifice? The way that the Romans looked upon "Horatio at the Bridge" (reality at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatii) is certainly an ancient, archytypical example. And, of course, the countless heros who save others in floods and other disasters, have no component of their behavior actually involving them deliberately giving up something. (True, they're brave, they take risks, etc.) To me, (and I gather to Max), it's sad that self-sacrifice has become an often important component of heroism. Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 06:06:25 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:06:25 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Devastated ideologies (was: italian politics as exi-chat subject) In-Reply-To: References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> <200803061735.51526.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803070006.25671.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote a very extropic > thread of thought: :) but he may not have necessarily made any new progress to report. > > Somebody was laughing at me the other day for suggesting that we > > build teh tech. Odd. Another thought that I would like to add, from > > my general observations on the state of those ideologies and the > > "old world". The status quo takes a lot of time to update. Lots and > > lots of time. > > But many structures reach the limit of their capacity and quickly > collapse, making way for new forms. Think punctuated change, > unevenly distributed, but tending to ratchet forward. This is true, and the collapse and degradation of such a large and distributed structure is going to be interesting and unlike the collapse of a ball of gas, but instead a multiphased and multifaceted construction of our own doing, we will see atypical fireworks. > > But on the other hand, we have significantly > > large organizations ("Left" and "Right") and ideologies still > > propagating and still abducting new minds even though there's no > > real power that is necessarily making news releases to gain eyes > > and get possible neophytes to convert (peculiar). > > Strange statement, considering the obvious and massive power > structures within society which seem to be doing just that. Hm. You're right. I'd rather refine my observation to point out that they are running on their own inertia of (even human) self-replication, to apply your terms. Otherwise there is no legitimate reason to 'convert' to Rightism or Leftism as far as I can tell. > > Today I was sitting in a > > psych class that was talking about 'developmental psychology', > > going over the theories of Piaget and the like, staged versus > > continuous development, emotional taxonomies and whatever else. The > > designs of the studies were simply wrong -- *no*, you _don't_ do > > longitudinal studies or cross-section studies, not at all -- that's > > studying a mystical 'normal' brain and the normal status quo does > > not necessarily represent something that is within the possibility > > space of the construction or growth of the human brain, it's not > > psychology at all (perhaps social studies, but only on a "pop" > > level, since real social studying would involve more, you know, > > hard (read: real) studying). > > I don't understand you particular criticism here, but I think it's > significant that sociology and psychology are at the least > "scientific" end of the scientific spectrum I am talking about the art of psychology itself, not the sociohistorical context of psychology, even though that is what I am being presented. It is the difference between accepting staleness versus creating. > > And the theories of, say, Maslow, were developed so as to promote > > a more 'humanist' idealization versus the other negative images of > > humans at the time and while there's nothing necessarily wrong with > > his ideas, they are not as intense as they could be. And what about > > marxism? Or libertarianism? Republicanism? Capitalism? Objectivism > > (cringe)? These are archaic, in more than a sense than "they are > > old" but that they do not fall into any particular coherency when, > > on the contrary, it seems that many historical figures were > > 'fighting' for coherency. > > [Insert Arrow of Morality here, with talk of increasing coherence > over an increasing context of values, promoted by increasingly > effective (scientific) means...] I'd like you to comment on the personal coherency arrow versus the social coherency arrow, I mentioned this either in this thread or another earlier today and think it would help here. (Ah, it looks like you did in the next snippit. But I still remember something else I mentioned today?) It is interesting to note that 'personal' can encompass society (just as I can potentially encompass an entire botnet or 18 wheeler to some extent, or perhaps grow and spawn enough people to make a society) but the reverse -- where society makes for myself -- does not work. (Chicken/egg?) > > ... perhaps instead we > > should be working on the art of self-creation, design of new ideas > > and societies from the ground up, integrating and sharing novelty > > from where ever it may come from. > > Just as all persistent novelty results from evolutionary processes, > we would do well to **intentionally** compete within synergistic > systems of cooperative growth. Our current position on the > evolutionary tree is a result of such processes, but we've just > reached the threshold of being able to play the game intentionally. You mention later that it is the culture that can allow us to do this, does this mean we need to first establish a significant population set first, or can this be bootstrapped from single individuals? > > But it seems that one must have their own > > internal journey of personal growth and development to come to > > this conclusion, to some extent isolated from society. > > Diversity is essential to evolutionary growth, accelerating with > selection via an increasingly evolved environment. How is it that isolation engenders diversity? > > Maybe we can propose > > some solutions to the Keepers of the Devastated Ideologies in an > > attempt to minimize their damage while seemingly maximizing their > > missions? Or alternatively start teaching parents how to help > > minimize the damage of society on their children as they grow up > > and prepare for the future ("the future is now / the singularity is > > now"). > > My own frustration has to do with the fundamental > (information-theoretic) impracticality of conveying larger contexts > to smaller systems (if they could decode (decompress) it, then they'd > already have the knowledge.) Conveying contexts doesn't work in the first place, right? It is interesting, though, that I, as a context, can move from one to another, and you the same, but that we cannot transfer $earth through these bits and bytes or even to the front of our attention as a giant map to look at and play with, without loss of tons of relevant context. And we're right back to where we were months ago with training individuals to be able to navigate and construct contexts. Circles? > I think the only practical way for us involves intentionally building > a supporting framework, or Culture, promoting our evolving values more > wisely than could any individual. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 06:13:51 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:13:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803070013.51722.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, PJ Manney wrote: > What I think Max is really asking (and even if it's a joke, tell me > if you're not) is how do we reprogram the human brain to fight a Autism/spectrum. These are the people that perform amazing feats of mental programming, some are able to construct mental firewalls so powerful that nothing can get through to them, while others are able to more constructively use these abilities. > million years of evolutionary psychology, where sacrifice (altruism) > was a successful strategy which was then reflected ... Luckily, natural selection did not select too strongly for our own self interpretation of the mind, so we have some leeway here more or less. > Most importantly, the hero should be reconceptualized through a > redefinition of 'self' and of 'sacrifice', not by the removal of The hero could be reconceptualized by redefining it as, say, yourself. > either, or you will suffer from a story about which the audience > couldn't give a tinker's damn, having neither an empathetic > protagonist, nor stakes to worry about. ?We don't need to rewrite the We call an unempathetic protagonist a supervillian. > myths from whole cloth. ?If we did, they wouldn't work as well. ?We > merely need to rejig them to our purposes. Yes, purpose is important in making the hero, but it is from within, it not necessarily a group 'we' that makes it. Actually, this might be suspect based off of Jef's response to my last post re: group coherency versus internal coherency. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 06:15:47 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:15:47 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803070015.47462.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 06 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > It sounds as though you've received the full blast of the > anti-sacrifice meme from your father and Ayn Rand. Lee, it is interesting that you mention Ayn Rand. I was thinking this too when I read over Max's post, and poor Jimmy Wales and all of those people pledging to Objectivism. Yikes. Anyway, I think there is definitely something to make sure we exclude from a redefinition of hero from the context of Objectivism, though I cannot immediately place my finger on it, and I seem to remember an extropian somewhere on this list that might be able/willing to regurgitate this nugget-argument. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 7 06:16:53 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:16:53 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307001101.0232b728@satx.rr.com> At 09:56 PM 3/6/2008 -0800, Lee wrote: >(True, they're [heroes are] brave, they take risks, etc.) > >To me, (and I gather to Max), it's sad that self-sacrifice has become an >often important component of heroism. But isn't it exactly to the point that *they take risks on behalf of others* which, by apparent rational calculation, they need not, perhaps ought not, take. Reciprocal altruism theory can "explain this away" but that leaves a rather sour taste in one's mouth--which, in turn, can of course be explained by the same reductive principle, but we don't *want* to be disabused, it's a very deep part of who we are that we feel these sentiments and, when circumstances arise, find ourselves driven by them. Damien Broderick From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 06:35:23 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:35:23 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > It sounds as though you've received the full blast of the anti-sacrifice > meme from your father and Ayn Rand. It was the flavor of Max's question that brought it up for me. I could be wrong about his intention, but yes, my name is PJ and I am the child of a recovering objectivist. Which is why I'm not one. > But seriously, why does heroic > conduct have to include self-sacrifice? The way that the Romans > looked upon "Horatio at the Bridge" (reality at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatii) > is certainly an ancient, archytypical example. And, of course, the countless > heros who save others in floods and other disasters, have no component > of their behavior actually involving them deliberately giving up something. > (True, they're brave, they take risks, etc.) But that's it. Risk taking. Which can lead to a possible bad end. Simply, the chances they take to succeed or fail involves the potential for sacrificing something. Not necessarily their lives, but something worthwhile enough that they and we don't want them to sacrifice if they don't have to. Sacrifice doesn't have to always involve life-or-death situations -- in fact, they rarely do in stories! -- but as I said before, the stakes must be worthwhile and meaningful, commensurate with the story involved, to engage the audience. (For example, in a romantic comedy, we're usually not worried about the hero losing his life. We're worried about the hero losing the girl, sacrificing his self-respect, etc. Those are worthy stakes commensurate with the story.) PJ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 06:45:17 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:45:17 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com><417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com><29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com><05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080307001101.0232b728@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <060701c8801f$0ea82060$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes >> To me, (and I gather to Max), it's sad that self-sacrifice >> has become an often important component of heroism. > > But isn't it exactly to the point that *they take risks on behalf of > others* which, by apparent rational calculation, they need not, > perhaps ought not, take. Yeah, heroic as defined on-line by one dictionary is as follows. 1. epic: very imposing or impressive; surpassing the ordinary (especially in size or scale); "an epic voyage"; "of heroic proportions"; "heroic ... 2. relating to or characteristic of heroes of antiquity; "heroic legends"; "the heroic age" 3. having or displaying qualities appropriate for heroes; "the heroic attack on the beaches of Normandy"; "heroic explorers" 4. [NOT RELEVANT] expansive: of behavior that is impressive and ambitious in scale or scope; "an expansive lifestyle"; "in the grand manner"; "collecting on a grand scale"; "heroic undertakings" 5. desperate: showing extreme courage; especially of actions courageously undertaken in desperation as a last resort; "made a last desperate attempt to reach the climber"; "the desperate gallantry of our naval task forces marked the turning point in the Pacific war"- G.C.Marshall; "they took heroic ... It's interesting that the *definitions* don't mention anything about sacrificing for others. But sadly, wikipedia under "heroism" says Later [after the Greeks], hero (male) and heroine (female) came to refer to characters that, in the face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, display courage and the will for self-sacrifice, that is, heroism, for some greater good, originally of martial courage or excellence but extended to more general moral excellence. If a protagonist went to another planet, say, and exhibited great courage, determination, ingenuity, and resourcefulness even just to save his own skin, I'd be happy to call that heroic. True, a dragon-slayer is, as they say, acting "for some greater good". So I think I agree with you. > Reciprocal altruism theory can "explain this > away" but that leaves a rather sour taste in one's mouth--which, in > turn, can of course be explained by the same reductive principle, but > we don't *want* to be disabused, it's a very deep part of who we are > that we feel these sentiments and, when circumstances arise, find > ourselves driven by them. What you write is true of most people---but not me, and I think, not most people on this list. Explaining that a particular hero is really an evolutionarily derived organism programmed for the most part by his genes (and for their benefit), and acting entirely in accordance with the laws of physics, takes absolutely nothing away from my admiration. Lee From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 06:50:56 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:50:56 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <200803070013.51722.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <200803070013.51722.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803062250n4b193fceic7d656edbbb759fe@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Thursday 06 March 2008, PJ Manney wrote: > > What I think Max is really asking (and even if it's a joke, tell me > > if you're not) is how do we reprogram the human brain to fight a > > Autism/spectrum. These are the people that perform amazing feats of > mental programming, some are able to construct mental firewalls so > powerful that nothing can get through to them, while others are able to > more constructively use these abilities. But then you have the difficulty of empathy, which is the key to storytelling. Which is why many, but by no means all autists have problems with myths and stories. It's hard for them to relate because empathy can be difficult. Of course, many don't have problems, like Anne. But it is interesting that Anne approaches stories and more importantly, characters, in a very different manner than I do, and it's not only because we come from different disciplines, or that I create characters for a living and she doesn't. It's a more fundamental difference in perception and processing of human behavior. > > Most importantly, the hero should be reconceptualized through a > > redefinition of 'self' and of 'sacrifice', not by the removal of > > The hero could be reconceptualized by redefining it as, say, yourself. That's not enough. Not every story is about "I" nor should it be. > We call an unempathetic protagonist a supervillian. No. Villains can be very empathetic, just terribly misguided and immoral as a result. Also, protagonists can be very misguided, even immoral, and still empathetic, too. Empathy doesn't involve white hats, white horses or anything else white for that matter. It just means you can imagine being in their shoes and you understand why they made the choices they made. If you can't generate empathy, meaning you can't imagine being that person, then you've got either a dull villain or a duller hero. Yawn... > Yes, purpose is important in making the hero, but it is from within, it > not necessarily a group 'we' that makes it. Actually, this might be > suspect based off of Jef's response to my last post re: group coherency > versus internal coherency. Sorry, not quite sure where you're going there. If you mean we don't create stories/heroes as a group, well you're right. And you're wrong. Just depends upon the scale of the context. And I'm too tired to go there right now. PJ From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Fri Mar 7 06:51:07 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:51:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <215844.1513.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> PJ Manney wrote: But that's it. Risk taking. Which can lead to a possible bad end. Simply, the chances they take to succeed or fail involves the potential for sacrificing something. Not necessarily their lives, but something worthwhile enough that they and we don't want them to sacrifice if they don't have to. Sacrifice doesn't have to always involve life-or-death situations -- in fact, they rarely do in stories! -- but as I said before, the stakes must be worthwhile and meaningful, commensurate with the story involved, to engage the audience. (For example, in a romantic comedy, we're usually not worried about the hero losing his life. We're worried about the hero losing the girl, sacrificing his self-respect, etc. Those are worthy stakes commensurate with the story.) PJ I have no argument with any of this -- I literally took the "self-sacrifice" thing to mean "sacrifice of a person's very life" in the initial context of the question, but you're right in pointing out that it isn't always life that's at risk. (To me I say, "Duh!") If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* important to him or her, but still manages heroism, then my first thought would be a kind of Zen-type character who has no "attachments" and therefore does not feel that any outcome represents a personal loss, even if others might consider particular outcomes very distressing. But I don't know if many readers would be able to relate to such a character. - Anne --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Fri Mar 7 06:25:16 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:25:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <720057.44645.qm@web56512.mail.re3.yahoo.com> PJ: I understand that emotional appeals to notions of sacrifice in stories can be effective from a "narrative device" standpoint. However, I'm confused by your suggestion that the pre-sacrificial "hero"'s apparent prescience has something to do with that particular emotional appeal. The point I was trying to make in the blog quote I posted was that in real life, there's no way to "know" the way heroes in stories seem to that their sacrifice is actually going to have the outcome they expect or want it to. And I agree that life imitates art, which is why I'm intrigued by the notion of formulating an heroic story in which the protagonist manages to act in a truly heroic manner without "self-sacrifice". Also, I should note here that when I read the phrase "self-sacrifice" I wasn't thinking in terms of hard work or altruism -- I'm not Ayn Rand. :P I was thinking in terms of the bit where the hero literally sacrifices his or her life for an ideal or for another person. But in general, I am interested in looking at ways to point out situations in real life that many people mistake for "zero sum" when they actually aren't, and in putting together literary works wherein the protagonists are able to creatively problem-solve in ways that respect all involved. I know there's a lot of dramatic tension inherent in the "struggle to resolve who wins in a zero-sum game", but it would be interesting to see if similarly satisfying levels of dramatic tension could be achieved in a setting where everyone manages to win in some way. In short, I'm curious about the prospects of a story with an Interesting and Non-Dumb Mega-Happy Ending. - Anne "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sentience at pobox.com Fri Mar 7 06:54:32 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:54:32 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47D0E6A8.2030202@pobox.com> I actually have no problem with the idea that self-sacrifice reveals heroism; it shows the importance to them of whatever they are pursuing. The implication that heroism *requires* self-sacrifice implies that there is no other way to show dedication, however. After all, the point of heroism is not to reveal virtue, but to protect that which is worth protecting. My own conceptualization of heroism is touched on somewhat in: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/11/superhero-bias.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/01/something-to-pr.html ** Superhero Bias Followup to: The Halo Effect Suppose there's a heavily armed sociopath, a kidnapper with hostages, who has just rejected all requests for negotiation and announced his intent to start killing. In real life, the good guys don't usually kick down the door when the bad guy has hostages. But sometimes - very rarely, but sometimes - life imitates Hollywood to the extent of genuine good guys needing to smash through a door. Imagine, in two widely separated realities, two heroes who charge into the room, first to confront the villain. In one reality, the hero is strong enough to throw cars, can fire power blasts out of his nostrils, has X-ray hearing, and his skin doesn't just deflect bullets but annihilates them on contact. The villain has ensconced himself in an elementary school and taken over two hundred children hostage; their parents are waiting outside, weeping. In another reality, the hero is a New York police officer, and the hostages are three prostitutes the villain collected off the street. Consider this question very carefully: Who is the greater hero? And who is more likely to get their own comic book? The halo effect is that perceptions of all positive traits are correlated. Profiles rated higher on scales of attractiveness, are also rated higher on scales of talent, kindness, honesty, and intelligence. And so comic-book characters who seem strong and invulnerable, both positive traits, also seem to possess more of the heroic traits of courage and heroism. And yet: "How tough can it be to act all brave and courageous when you're pretty much invulnerable?" -- Empowered, Vol. 1 I can't remember if I read the following point somewhere, or hypothesized it myself: Fame, in particular, seems to combine additively with all other personality characteristics. Consider Gandhi. Was Gandhi the most altruistic person of the 20th century, or just the most famous altruist? Gandhi faced police with riot sticks and soldiers with guns. But Gandhi was a celebrity, and he was protected by his celebrity. What about the others in the march, the people who faced riot sticks and guns even though there wouldn't be international headlines if they were put in the hospital or gunned down? What did Gandhi think of getting the headlines, the celebrity, the fame, the place in history, becoming the archetype for non-violent resistance, when he took less risk than any of the people marching with him? How did he feel when one of those anonymous heroes came up to him, eyes shining, and told Gandhi how wonderful he was? Did Gandhi ever visualize his world in those terms? I don't know; I'm not Gandhi. This is not in any sense a criticism of Gandhi. The point of non-violent resistance is not to show off your courage. That can be done much more easily by going over Niagara Falls in a barrel. Gandhi couldn't help being somewhat-but-not-entirely protected by his celebrity. And Gandhi's actions did take courage - not as much courage as marching anonymously, but still a great deal of courage. The bias I wish to point out is that Gandhi's fame score seems to get perceptually added to his justly accumulated altruism score. When you think about nonviolence, you think of Gandhi - not an anonymous protestor in one of Gandhi's marches who faced down riot clubs and guns, and got beaten, and had to be taken to the hospital, and walked with a limp for the rest of her life, and no one ever remembered her name. Similarly, which is greater - to risk your life to save two hundred children, or to risk your life to save three adults? The answer depends on what one means by greater. If you ever have to choose between saving three adults and saving two hundred children, then choose the latter. "Whoever saves a single life, it is as if he had saved the whole world" may be a fine applause light, but it's terrible moral advice if you've got to pick one or the other. So if you mean "greater" in the sense of "Which is more important?" or "Which is the preferred outcome?" or "Which should I choose if I have to do one or the other?" then it is greater to save two hundred than three. But if you ask about greatness in the sense of revealed virtue, then someone who would risk their life to save only three lives, reveals more courage than someone who would risk their life to save two hundred but not three. This doesn't mean that you can deliberately choose to risk your life to save three adults, and let the two hundred schoolchildren go hang, because you want to reveal more virtue. Someone who risks their life because they want to be virtuous has revealed far less virtue than someone who risks their life because they want to save others. Someone who chooses to save three lives rather than two hundred lives, because they think it reveals greater virtue, is so selfishly fascinated with their own "greatness" as to have committed the moral equivalent of manslaughter. It's one of those wu wei scenarios: You cannot reveal virtue by trying to reveal virtue. Given a choice between a safe method to save the world which involves no personal sacrifice or discomfort, and a method that risks your life and requires you to endure great privation, you cannot become a hero by deliberately choosing the second path. There is nothing heroic about wanting to be a hero. It would be a lost purpose. Truly virtuous people who are genuinely trying to save lives, rather than trying to reveal virtue, will constantly seek to save more lives with less effort, which means that less of their virtue will be revealed. It may be confusing, but it's not contradictory. But we cannot always choose to be invulnerable to bullets. After we've done our best to reduce risk and increase scope, any remaining heroism is well and truly revealed. The police officer who puts their life on the line with no superpowers, no X-Ray vision, no super-strength, no ability to fly, and above all no invulnerability to bullets, reveals far greater virtue than Superman - who is only a mere superhero. ** Something to Protect Followup to: Tsuyoku Naritai, Circular Altruism In the gestalt of (ahem) Japanese fiction, one finds this oft-repeated motif: Power comes from having something to protect. I'm not just talking about superheroes that power up when a friend is threatened, the way it works in Western fiction. In the Japanese version it runs deeper than that. In the X saga it's explicitly stated that each of the good guys draw their power from having someone - one person - who they want to protect. Who? That question is part of X's plot - the "most precious person" isn't always who we think. But if that person is killed, or hurt in the wrong way, the protector loses their power - not so much from magical backlash, as from simple despair. This isn't something that happens once per week per good guy, the way it would work in a Western comic. It's equivalent to being Killed Off For Real - taken off the game board. The way it works in Western superhero comics is that the good guy gets bitten by a radioactive spider; and then he needs something to do with his powers, to keep him busy, so he decides to fight crime. And then Western superheroes are always whining about how much time their superhero duties take up, and how they'd rather be ordinary mortals so they could go fishing or something. Similarly, in Western real life, unhappy people are told that they need a "purpose in life", so they should pick out an altruistic cause that goes well with their personality, like picking out nice living-room drapes, and this will brighten up their days by adding some color, like nice living-room drapes. You should be careful not to pick something too expensive, though. In Western comics, the magic comes first, then the purpose: Acquire amazing powers, decide to protect the innocent. In Japanese fiction, often, it works the other way around. Of course I'm not saying all this to generalize from fictional evidence. But I want to convey a concept whose deceptively close Western analogue is not what I mean. I have touched before on the idea that a rationalist must have something they value more than "rationality": The Art must have a purpose other than itself, or it collapses into infinite recursion. But do not mistake me, and think I am advocating that rationalists should pick out a nice altruistic cause, by way of having something to do, because rationality isn't all that important by itself. No. I am asking: Where do rationalists come from? How do we acquire our powers? It is written in the Twelve Virtues of Rationality: How can you improve your conception of rationality? Not by saying to yourself, "It is my duty to be rational." By this you only enshrine your mistaken conception. Perhaps your conception of rationality is that it is rational to believe the words of the Great Teacher, and the Great Teacher says, "The sky is green," and you look up at the sky and see blue. If you think: "It may look like the sky is blue, but rationality is to believe the words of the Great Teacher," you lose a chance to discover your mistake. Historically speaking, the way humanity finally left the trap of authority and began paying attention to, y'know, the actual sky, was that beliefs based on experiment turned out to be much more useful than beliefs based on authority. Curiosity has been around since the dawn of humanity, but the problem is that spinning campfire tales works just as well for satisfying curiosity. Historically speaking, science won because it displayed greater raw strength in the form of technology, not because science sounded more reasonable. To this very day, magic and scripture still sound more reasonable to untrained ears than science. That is why there is continuous social tension between the belief systems. If science not only worked better than magic, but also sounded more intuitively reasonable, it would have won entirely by now. Now there are those who say: "How dare you suggest that anything should be valued more than Truth? Must not a rationalist love Truth more than mere usefulness?" Forget for a moment what would have happened historically to someone like that - that people in pretty much that frame of mind defended the Bible because they loved Truth more than mere accuracy. Propositional morality is a glorious thing, but it has too many degrees of freedom. No, the real point is that a rationalist's love affair with the Truth is, well, just more complicated as an emotional relationship. One doesn't become an adept rationalist without caring about the truth, both as a purely moral desideratum and as something that's fun to have. I doubt there are many master composers who hate music. But part of what I like about rationality is the discipline imposed by requiring beliefs to yield predictions, which ends up taking us much closer to the truth than if we sat in the living room obsessing about Truth all day. I like the complexity of simultaneously having to love True-seeming ideas, and also being ready to drop them out the window at a moment's notice. I even like the glorious aesthetic purity of declaring that I value mere usefulness above aesthetics. That is almost a contradiction, but not quite; and that has an aesthetic quality as well, a delicious humor. And of course, no matter how much you profess your love of mere usefulness, you should never actually end up deliberately believing a useful false statement. So don't oversimplify the relationship between loving truth and loving usefulness. It's not one or the other. It's complicated, which is not necessarily a defect in the moral aesthetics of single events. But morality and aesthetics alone, believing that one ought to be "rational" or that certain ways of thinking are "beautiful", will not lead you to the center of the Way. It wouldn't have gotten humanity out of the authority-hole. In Circular Altruism, I discussed this dilemma: Which of these options would you prefer: 1. Save 400 lives, with certainty 2. Save 500 lives, 90% probability; save no lives, 10% probability. You may be tempted to grandstand, saying, "How dare you gamble with people's lives?" Even if you, yourself, are one of the 500 - but you don't know which one - you may still be tempted to rely on the comforting feeling of certainty, because our own lives are often worth less to us than a good intuition. But if your precious daughter is one of the 500, and you don't know which one, then, perhaps, you may feel more impelled to shut up and multiply - to notice that you have an 80% chance of saving her in the first case, and a 90% chance of saving her in the second. And yes, everyone in that crowd is someone's son or daughter. Which, in turn, suggests that we should pick the second option as altruists, as well as concerned parents. My point is not to suggest that one person's life is more valuable than 499 people. What I am trying to say is that more than one's own life has to be at stake, before someone becomes desperate enough to override comfortable intuitions with math. It takes visceral panic, channeled through cold calculation, to cut away all the distractions. What if you believe that it is "rational" to choose the certainty of option 1? Lots of people think that "rationality" is about choosing only methods that are certain to work, and rejecting all uncertainty. But, hopefully, you care more about your daughter's life than about "rationality". Will pride in your own virtue as a rationalist save you? Not if you believe that it is virtuous to choose certainty. You will only be able to learn something about rationality if your daughter's life matters more to you than your pride as a rationalist. You may even learn something about rationality from the experience, if you are already far enough grown in your Art to say, "I must have had the wrong conception of rationality," and not, "Look at how rationality gave me the wrong answer!" (The essential difficulty in becoming a master rationalist is that you need quite a bit of rationality to bootstrap the learning process.) Is your belief that you ought to be rational, more important than your life? Because, as I've previously observed, risking your life isn't comparatively all that scary. Being the lone voice of dissent in the crowd and having everyone look at you funny is much scarier than a mere threat to your life, according to the revealed preferences of teenagers who drink at parties and then drive home. It will take something terribly important to make you willing to leave the pack. A threat to your life won't be enough. Is your will to rationality stronger than your pride? Can it be, if your will to rationality stems from your pride in your self-image as a rationalist? It's helpful - very helpful - to have a self-image which says that you are the sort of person who confronts harsh truth. It's helpful to have too much self-respect to knowingly lie to yourself or refuse to face evidence. But there may come a time when you have to admit that you've been doing rationality all wrong. Then your pride, your self-image as a rationalist, may make that too hard to face. If you've prided yourself on believing what the Great Teacher says - even when it seems harsh, even when you'd rather not - that may make it all the more bitter a pill to swallow, to admit that the Great Teacher is a fraud, and all your noble self-sacrifice was for naught. Where do you get the will to keep moving forward? When I look back at my own personal journey toward rationality - not just humanity's historical journey - well, I grew up believing very strongly that I ought to be rational. This made me an above-average Traditional Rationalist a la Feynman and Heinlein, and nothing more. It did not drive me to go beyond the teachings I had received. I only began to grow further as a rationalist once I had something terribly important that I needed to do. Something more important than my pride as a rationalist, never mind my life. Only when you become more wedded to success than to any of your beloved techniques of rationality, do you begin to appreciate these words of Miyamoto Musashi: "You can win with a long weapon, and yet you can also win with a short weapon. In short, the Way of the Ichi school is the spirit of winning, whatever the weapon and whatever its size." -- Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings Don't mistake this for a specific teaching of rationality. It describes how you learn the Way, beginning with a desperate need to succeed. No one masters the Way until more than their life is at stake. More than their comfort, more even than their pride. You can't just pick out a Cause like that because you feel you need a hobby. Go looking for a "good cause", and your mind will just fill in a standard cliche. Learn how to multiply, and perhaps you will recognize a drastically important cause when you see one. But if you have a cause like that, it is right and proper to wield your rationality in its service. To strictly subordinate the aesthetics of rationality to a higher cause, is part of the aesthetic of rationality. You should pay attention to that aesthetic: You will never master rationality well enough to win with any weapon, if you do not appreciate the beauty for its own sake. ** The kind of dedication that drove Musashi to win with any weapon - this reveals itself in heroism that sacrifices itself for that something to protect, but it also reveals itself in the drive to win whatever the weapon and whatever its size. With self-sacrifice, if that is the winning way; and without self-sacrifice, if it is not. So, do I get a PhD? -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 07:05:42 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:05:42 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <060701c8801f$0ea82060$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080307001101.0232b728@satx.rr.com> <060701c8801f$0ea82060$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <29666bf30803062305y2ebd54d4o5fd4823315ce17ae@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Yeah, heroic as defined on-line by one dictionary is as follows. > > 1. epic: very imposing or impressive; surpassing the ordinary > (especially in size or scale); "an epic voyage"; "of heroic > proportions"; "heroic ... > > 2. relating to or characteristic of heroes of antiquity; "heroic > legends"; "the heroic age" > > 3. having or displaying qualities appropriate for heroes; "the > heroic attack on the beaches of Normandy"; "heroic explorers" > > 4. [NOT RELEVANT] expansive: of behavior that is impressive > and ambitious in scale or scope; "an expansive lifestyle"; "in the > grand manner"; "collecting on a grand scale"; "heroic undertakings" > > 5. desperate: showing extreme courage; especially of actions > courageously undertaken in desperation as a last resort; "made a > last desperate attempt to reach the climber"; "the desperate > gallantry of our naval task forces marked the turning point in the > Pacific war"- G.C.Marshall; "they took heroic ... > > It's interesting that the *definitions* don't mention anything about > sacrificing for others. But sadly, wikipedia under "heroism" says But I'm confused. Self-sacrifice is clearly implied in definitions 2, 3 & 5. The heroes of antiquity (2), Normandy (3) and the Mountains/Pacific (5) demonstrated it. I'm more intrigued why this concept is such a problem for you. When you read fiction, do you empathize with the characters? Or do you relate more to the concepts? PJ From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Fri Mar 7 06:40:26 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:40:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307001101.0232b728@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <318653.20566.qm@web56514.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Damien Broderick wrote: But isn't it exactly to the point that *they take risks on behalf of others* which, by apparent rational calculation, they need not, perhaps ought not, take. Along these lines, I think it's worth noting that sometimes particular kinds of "self-sacrifice" are demanded and valorized under the false presumption that these particular sacrifices always or almost always correlate with Good Character and the capacity for actual heroic sacrifice when the need for such arises. >From the same blog entry I quoted before: "...most [life-extensionists] would not hesitate to defend our loved ones and friends with our lives if it became necessary to do so. Just because a person doesn't quite fancy the idea of dying of "old age" or disease doesn't mean that that person wouldn't dive into a pond to save a drowning child, or pull a pedestrian out of the path of an oncoming car at personal risk." I guess what I'm trying to say here is that people shouldn't need to have to "self-negate" (e.g., consider their own life perfectly expendable) in order to take self-sacrificing actions when necessary. To me, there's a difference between wanting to be alive and generally liking who you are (which to me just seems healthy), and feeling like you are the most important thing in existence to the point where you'd never dream of putting yourself in danger for the sake of others. - Anne --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 07:19:16 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:19:16 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080307001101.0232b728@satx.rr.com> <060701c8801f$0ea82060$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803062305y2ebd54d4o5fd4823315ce17ae@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <063901c88023$f9bfb3c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ writes >> 2. relating to or characteristic of heroes of antiquity; "heroic >> legends"; "the heroic age" >> >> 3. having or displaying qualities appropriate for heroes; "the >> heroic attack on the beaches of Normandy"; "heroic explorers" >> >> 5. desperate: showing extreme courage; especially of actions >> courageously undertaken in desperation as a last resort; "made a >> last desperate attempt to reach the climber"; "the desperate >> gallantry of our naval task forces marked the turning point in the >> Pacific war"- G.C.Marshall; "they took heroic ... >> >> It's interesting that the *definitions* don't mention anything about >> sacrificing for others. > > But I'm confused. Self-sacrifice is clearly implied in definitions 2, > 3 & 5. Hmm, I don't think that that is what "self-sacrifice" means to me, and I would guess it isn't what Max meant when he started this thread. Risk taking is (to me) not at all what self-sacrifice means. The latter is when you *sacrifice* that is, you *deliberately* give up something valuable to you. Those soldiers, explorers, heros of antiquity all wanted to sacrifice nothing---except perhaps their adversaries. They hoped to live through it, and if they got acclaim or riches, all the better. > The heroes of antiquity (2), Normandy (3) and the > Mountains/Pacific (5) demonstrated it. > > I'm more intrigued why this concept is such a problem for you. Eh? It doesn't seem to me to be a problem for me at all. My notions coincide with the definitions given, (I think). My only beef is that (we conjecture) in recent decades heroism is taken to include self-sacrifice as I used the term above. > When you read fiction, do you empathize with the characters? Of course. Very much so. Especially when I like them. Lee From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 7 07:52:34 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:52:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: I don't think that the hero can pull it off without the selfless aspect because he must become the light against a dark shadow, to grow from a trace of himself into full maturity, i.e. to be more than he is initially. Otherwise he is a shadow, dark like the monster whom he is trying to defeat. So the combination of qualities which the hero requires to overcome the monster (i.e. in the process of performing his heroic act,) then, is to act in a large cause outside himself, he must show himself inwardly strong, determined, totally self-reliant, become a light beacon, and in the end, the final key in the lock is to have superior understanding or vision than the monster. That makes a hero. :-) Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From estropico at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 09:41:33 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:41:33 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> I will try to keep this civil, ignore those remarks of Vaj's that border on the slanderous, and put forward a proposal that I feel could be an acceptable compromise on the topic of Vaj's alleged penchant for nazi iconography. On the subject of the alleged Waffen-SS-lookalike business logo: > [?] my forename being Stefano my initials are SS and so are > embroidered on my shirts and boxers, the fact being allegedly a > telltale sign of my ideological preferences? You see, if Stefano's Waffen-SS-like business logo was the only hint of his borderline (?) neofascist sympaties, I *could* give him the benefit of the doubt ? who knows, perhaps it *is* all just a bizarre coincidence after all. But (and this is just one example) he describes himself as an "overhumanist" ("sovrumanista") and has written a more than sympathetic introduction to Giorgio Locchi's "Political Expression and Repression of the Overhumanist Principle" * a text in which we read that fascism is "the first political manifestation of a larger spiritual and cultural phenomenon, which we can call 'overhumanism'." The coincidence thing suddenly doesn't seem that convincing anymore. *http://www.uomo-libero.com/index.php?url=%2Farticolo.php%3Fid%3D293&hash=%20 > my firm's trademark [was] adopted *7 years before my birth* (!) What I find simply beyond comprehension is how anyone could not feel extremely uncomfortable with such a logo for all those years, and not feel the urgent need to do something about it. I mean we're not talking about a slight resemblance here, but a veritable Waffen-SS lookalike! Or maybe, in my old age, lost in my Vaj-persecution-mania, I've started to see things. I asked already and I'll ask again: if this logo is as trivial and innocent as Vaj so hard tries to convince us it is, why not just give us the url so the list can see it and make up its own mind? Go ahead, Stefano, just prove me wrong. But Vaj is being coy with his real name ? fair enough. I think the following might be a reasonable and acceptable compromise: we could post the animated version of the logo on YouTube, removing the references to Stefano's business, his real surname and the business' url. Stefano, what do you think? If you don't have the time or technical know-how, I'd be happy to do that for you. One last thing on the logo. Vaj stated that it was adopted several years before his birth (therefore, I guess, at some point in the '50s). However, somebody, at some point, must have taken the trouble (and expense) to get a web-animated version of the logo ? this was obviously done in much recent times. And in the animated version the SS logo is even more obvious - at some point it is unencumbered by any other graphical element and can be admired in all its "splendour"... On the threats of legal action: > I have never instructed any lawyer to represent me with regard to > the more or less libelous statements of the author of the message > above [estropico] Somehow I find it hard to believe, but if you say so. Hey, perhaps it's the people at your legal firm that are embarassed at being associated with your political writings. Perhaps we should take a leaf from their book. > On the other hands my partners, > namely those in charge with the firm's own legal representationare not > really happy, irrespective of what they may think of my > extra-curricular activities, that somebody may think it funny, for the > sake of my moral assassination, to have the firm described on the Web > as a business cover for a band of lunatics of dubious political > affiliations? I think your memory might be playing tricks on you. I actually went out of my way to report your own reply to the logo controversy, quoting the fact the company is "perfectly respectable". Obviously that part of my article has now been removed from the web, but I was in the middle of translating the whole thing into English, so here's a translation of the passage in question: "And of course there is the astonishing choice of a logo for his business by the more prominent superhumanist, Stefano Vaj (pseudonym of Stefano XXX). Just in case the logo at the top of the page (www.XXX.com) isn't clear enough, click on the one at the bottom of the left-hand column for an animated version with accompanying marching music. Vaj's reply, once this became known, has been that his company is perfectly respectable and that none of its clients (which include many well known international businesses) have ever complained about its logo. That might well be the case, but it doesn't explain why on earth would anyone want to include obvious Nazi imagery in one's business logo. And given such a controversial image we do find it rather embarassing that the postal address of AIT [the Italian Transhumanist Association] is the same as Vaj's legal practice." On the subject of my alleged frustrated aims to become AIT's president - or whatever: > I am now even more glad that the webmaster of > www.estropico.com, who was invited. in a spirit of perhaps excessive > ecumenism, in view of the interesting stuff he translated in Italian > in his web site, eventually declined to participate Just for the record: I have cut down on the amount of time I'm willing to spend on transhumanist activism due to changed personal circumstances (I am now the proud father of a very young girl - what am I doing spending all this time on this flame is beyond me). My involvelment with the UK Transhumanist Association is now marginal, but I decided to keep Estropico.com going. I orginally, and reluctantly, accepted the offer to be part of the association's council of "proboviri" (guarantors?), mainly following the urging to do so by those that saw me as a counterbalance to Vaj's presence. After several months of waiting without anything happening, and a few (three), admittedly not particularly forceful, enquiries on my part, it became apparent to me that there was no point even enquiring any further... As things stands I don't even think I'm going to renew my membership, never mind wanting to be associated too closely with AIT - I'd rather give the money to the Mprize! At any rate, I think Sefano Vaj underestimates my own knowledge of my own limits: I'm perfectly aware that I wouldn't make a suitable president for AIT (I'm not a published author or an academic and I wouldn't have the time for it anyway), so he can rest assured that, if and when AIT ever has internal elections, he's very unlikely to get any competition from myself. Cheers, Fabio > Message: 25 > Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:53:02 +0100 > From: "Stefano Vaj" > Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof > To: "ExI chat list" > Message-ID: > <580930c20803060853i397b87a5hba05d0b6ac599f84 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Longish message, only for real lovers of flame wars and human psychopathology... > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 10:12 AM, estropico wrote: > > I am not surprised, though. I originally included the above > > information in an article on my website regarding the neofascist (?) > > transhumanists, but I was forced to remove it following legal threats > > from Stefano "Vaj"'s lawyers. Would he have won in court? I doubt it, > > but he's the managing partner of a big law firm and I'm not... That's > > way I'm going to be careful about what I say on a public forum such as > > this. > > Uff... (what is the emoticon for boredom?). > > Just for the record, and then I will not play any further in the hands > of the couple of a few full-time disgruntled would-be presidents of > the AIT - significantly 100% absent from any kind of thread in this > list that does not concern my humble self - by deigning them with an > answer (an entirely different iissue being that of good-faith third > parties who may be interested in knowing better my ideas or writings, > as a couple of people have privately made me the honour of being): > > - I have never instructed any lawyer to represent me with regard to > the more or less libelous statements of the author of the message > above, firstly because I am probably not exasperated enough yet, > secondly because, as the "true totalitarist" I am accused to be, I > prefer to err on the side of... freedom of speech. > > - Yes, I happen to have two names, for family reasons that are > nobody's business, and more or less casually I started much time ago > of making alternative, rather than joint, use of them, depending on > the circumstances. No big conspiracy or secrecy here, as I am widely > known with both, and by spending a little time on Google one may even > find instances of joint usage. Now, the firm which I am a partner of - > and which was founded *27 years* before I joined it as a paralegal, > then climbing the career's ladder - happens to bear the same name, > which - sinister circumstance indeed - starts with an "S". So that, > hear hear, my forename being Stefano my initials are SS and so are > embroidered on my shirts and boxers, the fact being allegedly a > telltale sign of my ideological preferences, as would be the fact that > my firm's trademark, adopted *7 years before my birth* (!), employs > angular fonts, which never disturbed the clients making use of our > services in five different European jurisdictions, including notorious > neo-nazi organisations such as Ford or IBM, the governments of Romania > or that of Lombardy, not mention innumerable Jewish and Israeli > clients. If anything, the fact that I am using the name Vaj when I am > not writing on legal theory or international business law, may > "protect" my firm from association with what I do in a purely private > capacity, be it my membership in the Rotary International or in the > World Transhumanist Association. Certainly not the other way around, > as the "discovery" of my firm's name would seem intended to > demonstrate, namely that I would be here in some sort of "disguise" > (!) of my true self. > > - Do such petty and childish "investigations" and aspersion casting > exercises, emphatically reported on the Web, sound as an odious > invasion of my privacy? Sure, but life is still too short to pay > attention to every such annoyance. On the other hands my partners, > namely those in charge with the firm's own legal representationare not > really happy, irrespective of what they may think of my > extra-curricular activities, that somebody may think it funny, for the > sake of my moral assassination, to have the firm described on the Web > as a business cover for a band of lunatics of dubious political > affiliations, and I am informed that they actually send a letter "to > cease and desist" to the webmaster of www.estropico.com, threatening > recourse to the appropriate civil and criminal remedies, a threat that > I have no doubts was not idle in the least. > > - As for the "unelected national secretary of the Associazione > Italiana Transumanisti etc. etc.": the legitimate owner of the name > AIT, Riccardo Campa, decided at a point in time with a few fellow > transhumanists of very diverse professional, political and > philosophical background to incorporate the loose group at that time > going under that name as an Italian non-profit legal entity. In fact, > I gladly accepted the invitation to be amongst the founders of such > entity, who obviously decided by unanimous agreement its inner > organisational working and the names and capacity of the initial > officers. I am now even more glad that the webmaster of > www.estropico.com, who was invited. in a spirit of perhaps excessive > ecumenism, in view of the interesting stuff he translated in Italian > in his web site, eventually declined to participate - even though he > became a member at a later stage, probably with the exclusive purpose > of pretending an interest in the sort of the organisation and of > justifying his reiterated "denounciations" of its "dangerous drift". > > As for the ideas and programmes of the AIT, one can directly check > from its Web site at http://www.transumanisti.it and hopefully have > access soon to an English version of the Manifesto that we have > recently, and again unanimously, approved. Now, I understand that some > people may take its content as a "dangerous drift" away from sectarian > and "debatable" positions they promote, but I fear that they will have > to live with that in the foreseeable future, since it is now amongst > the official charts of the AIT. > > Stefano Vaj From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 11:43:34 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:43:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM, estropico wrote: > I will try to keep this civil, ignore those remarks of Vaj's that > border on the slanderous, and put forward a proposal that I feel could > be an acceptable compromise on the topic of Vaj's alleged penchant for > nazi iconography... To the attention of the list moderator(s): as a subscriber I am beginning to find this exchange very boring and very far from the content that I wish to read here. This has been said by many others if I am not mistaken. Could somebody please issue a reminder to all participants in this off-topic thread. From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:17:01 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:17:01 -0300 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? References: <47D0AEE4.9090705@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <009601c8804d$28213080$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Richard Loosemore> Unfortunately, I think I was not clear enough, and as a result you have > misunderstood what I said in rather a substantial way. > When you build an AGI, you *must* sort out the motivation mechanism > ahead of time, or the machine will simply not work at all. You don't > build an AGI and *then* discover what its motivation is. Let me throw more wood into the fire then. I am not afraid of AGIs at all. But let's imagine a scenario where some humans begin to worship the AGI as some sort of deity (yes, humans can be that messed up). A sect could quickly evolve around the AGI and THAT is something I consider dangerous. Not the AGI itself, but those possible post modern religious fanatics. The difference between these new fanatics and the present day fanatics that we all know and don't love is that their god really exists (I'm sure there's already some distopic scifi novel that has already addressed this issue). From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:21:31 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:21:31 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Lee Corbin> And once a human is successfully uploaded, the proof of the > pudding will be that his or her friends find communicating with > the upload to be essentially indistinguishable from communicating > with the original. And how would it de different from a perfect simulation? From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:27:41 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 06:27:41 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <009601c8804d$28213080$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <47D0AEE4.9090705@lightlink.com> <009601c8804d$28213080$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <200803070627.41981.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > that messed up). A sect could quickly evolve around the AGI and THAT > is something I consider dangerous. Not the AGI itself, but those > possible post modern religious fanatics. The difference between these > new fanatics and the present day fanatics that we all know and don't > love is that their god really exists (I'm sure there's already some > distopic scifi novel that has already addressed this issue). http://orionsarm.com/ - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:24:53 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:24:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Small H+ success story Message-ID: <580930c20803070424k12cdecf7nfecc5760083894de@mail.gmail.com> Speaking of the failed referendum for the abrogation of the Italian prohibitionist law on IFV, cloning and genetic engineering, on Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Amara Graps wrote: From: "Stefano Vaj" > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > > > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: > >> Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you > >> answer? > > > >Mmhhh. Lack of information? Censorship by mainstream media? Cultural > >limits? Insufficient mobilisation or blatant betrayal of the forces > >who should theoretically have supported the referendum? Fear of the > >swinging catholic 4-5% in the upcoming elections ? The > >clever presentation of the law by its supporters as something > >concerning only couples with fertility problems (in fact it forbids > >almost all kinds of human reproductive or genetic technology)? > > Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the > challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you > say? > ... > Your other examples (which depend on education, pure research funding, > political agendas, the Vatican's influence in Italy's politics) have > similar (IMO insurmountable) challenges. > Yet, I am happy to report as -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:44:29 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 06:44:29 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <215844.1513.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <215844.1513.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803070644.29129.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Anne Corwin wrote: > If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* > important to him or her, but still manages heroism, then my first > thought would be a kind of Zen-type character who has no > "attachments" and therefore does not feel that any outcome represents > a personal loss, even if others might consider particular outcomes > very distressing. ?But I don't know if many readers would be able to > relate to such a character. In this context, others would look upon the Zen character and say that he has sacrificed so much to have no 'attachments' as you say. So if anybody is able to say something negative about the character, is that character no longer a hero? Certainly not, so I suppose we must limit the definition to what the hero himself interprets self-sacrifice to be. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 12:51:22 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 06:51:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <720057.44645.qm@web56512.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <720057.44645.qm@web56512.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803070651.22906.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Anne Corwin wrote: > ?I know there's a lot of dramatic tension inherent in the "struggle > to resolve who wins in a zero-sum game", but it would be interesting > to see if similarly satisfying levels of dramatic tension could be > achieved in a setting where everyone manages to win in some way. That's interesting. Perhaps the dramatic tension can be envoked from the reader by well-done written work that can draw the reader into a trance to figure out just how this "nonzerosumness" works out? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 13:33:47 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:33:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803070533l23ba1270qa6782ca2d618cbe2@mail.gmail.com> On the subject of the failed referendum for the abrogation of the Italian prohibitionist law on IFV, cloning and genetic engineering, on Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Amara Graps wrote in the ExI chat list: > From: "Stefano Vaj" > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > > > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: > >> Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you > >> answer? > > > >Mmhhh. Lack of information? Censorship by mainstream media? Cultural > >limits? Insufficient mobilisation or blatant betrayal of the forces > >who should theoretically have supported the referendum? Fear of the > >swinging catholic 4-5% in the upcoming elections ? The > >clever presentation of the law by its supporters as something > >concerning only couples with fertility problems (in fact it forbids > >almost all kinds of human reproductive or genetic technology)? > > Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the > challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you > say? > ... > Your other examples (which depend on education, pure research funding, > political agendas, the Vatican's influence in Italy's politics) have > similar (IMO insurmountable) challenges. > Yet, sometimes one can find himself in the position of making a small difference, and this confirms me in the opinion of the importance of keeping up the good fight everywhere and on any occasions, including in Italy with all its problems. In fact, as mentioned another time, I was recently honoured by the appointment as one of the five "wise men" instructed by the parliament of Lombardy to draft a kind-of constitution (Statuto). In fact, Italy has moved towards a slightly more federal form of State, and each single administrative region had to adopt such a chart reflecting its own new powers and fundamental principles. Lombardy is one of the last to adopt it, and one should remember that its economic weight and population is comparable to that of many entire EU countries. This has been a very interesting professional experience, because practising lawyers are more likely to be instructed to draft contracts than constitutions, and scholars usually comment them but do not play any great role in determining their actual wording. Besides that, it goes without saying that even though I had in principle no real say with regard to the politics and philosophy behind the new constitution - something which is obviously reserved to elected representatives - I took the opportunity to pepper generously my draft with transhumanist memes and spins in at least a dozen different places. Of course, I was fully aware that little of all that work was going to survive to parliamentary vagaries and, more importantly, to the reactions of the hyper-important and much courted swinging-vote teocon representatives present in both the right-wing majority and the left-wing minority (actually the catholics in the second area called themselves "teodems", but the difference is often very subtle). Add to that the deep roots of explicitely neo-luddist, "deep-ecology", environmentalism in the ranks of a well-represented extreme Left, and the least I can say is that anti-H+ knee-jerk reactions from different sectors were not such a great surprise. On the other hand, I am very glad to report that a few little things managed to survive that are not so trivial in the Italian cultural, legal and political landscape, namely in the following provisions: Art. 2: "In particular, in the framework of its competences, the Lombardy Region: ... e) promotes the preconditions to make effective the freedom of religion, of thought, of speech, or teaching, of research, including what pertains to the access to communication media." ( In particolare, nell'ambito delle sue competenze, la Regione: e) promuove le condizioni per rendere effettiva la libert? religiosa, di pensiero, di parola, di insegnamento, di educazione, di ricerca, nonch? l'accesso ai mezzi di comunicazione;) Art. 10: "Research and Innovation 1. The Lombardy Region recognises the central and driving role of the scientific research and of innovation for the achievement of its goals in all the areas of the economic and social life, and strives to achieve a maximal exploitment of its potential, in cooperation and through exchanges with universities, research centres, and techno-scientific and professional communities. 2. The Lombardy Region shall recognise, promote and support technological, scientific and industrial innovations; investments and initiatives in the fields of fundamental and applied research, as well as everything necessary to the achievement of results of excellence in those areas, including whatever pertains to related decision-making and to information spreading. ..." (Ricerca e innovazione: 1. La Regione riconosce il ruolo centrale e trainante della ricerca scientifica e dell'innovazione per il conseguimento dei propri obiettivi in tutte le sfere della vita economica e sociale e opera per valorizzarne al massimo grado il potenziale, in collaborazione e dialogo con le universit?, i centri di ricerca, le comunit? tecnico-scientifiche e professionali. 2. La Regione valorizza, promuove e incentiva l'innovazione tecnica, scientifica e produttiva, gli investimenti e le iniziative nel campo della ricerca di base e applicata, nonch? quanto necessario al raggiungimento di risultati di eccellenza in tali ambiti, ivi compresi gli aspetti attinenti la formazione delle decisioni e la loro divulgazione. ...) Sure, we are talking of purely programmatic points, and the devils will as usually be in the implementation (if any...) of the "principles" above. At the same time, I am proud to say that at least some Italian transhumanists can now refer to a public document of constitutional relevance whenever the values embedded in the provisions above come into discussion. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 13:36:47 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:36:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > Lee Corbin> And once a human is successfully uploaded, the proof of the > > > pudding will be that his or her friends find communicating with > > the upload to be essentially indistinguishable from communicating > > with the original. > > And how would it de different from a perfect simulation? I think it wouldn't be different at all, but if we accept that we live in a phenomenic, rather than noumenic, reality this is all there is to say. Stefano Vaj From scerir at libero.it Fri Mar 7 13:51:06 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:51:06 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> Giu1i0 scrive: > To the attention of the list moderator(s): as a subscriber I am > beginning to find this exchange very boring and very far from the > content that I wish to read here. This has been said by many others if > I am not mistaken. Could somebody please issue a reminder to all > participants in this off-topic thread. Giulio, while the specific 'querelle' may be off-topic, isn't off topic here - at least imo - the *compatibility* between the Extropian Principles and what Stefano wrote, or writes. I think it is not so easy, for our f?hrer, to check this compatibility since Stefano wrote (I guess) in Italian, and even the 'Manifesto' is not translated in English. But I can agree: this stuff is boring. -serafino From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 14:37:20 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 06:37:20 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Henrique and Stephano comment on uploads as "simulations". Stephano writes > Henrique Moraes Machado wrote > > wrote: > > Lee Corbin wrote > > > > > And once a human is successfully uploaded, the proof of the > > > pudding will be that his or her friends find communicating with > > > the upload to be essentially indistinguishable from communicating > > > with the original. > > > > And how would it be different from a perfect simulation? > > I think it wouldn't be different at all, but if we accept that we live > in a phenomenic, rather than noumenic, reality this is all there is to > say. I agree. But "simulation" is ambiguous, I've always said. A very, very good actor (especially if he's a superhuman AI), might simulate you just fine, fooling all your friends and relatives. In other words, this god-like being is just pulling the strings on a puppet. Unfortunately, that counts as a successful simulation of you on some usages of the term. But to *emulate* you means that something really is you, just as one operating system may emulate another. I didn't make this distinction above when I first wrote, due to shortage of space. A successful upload emulates you perfectly, has your thoughts and feelings (or, perhaps the ones you may have tomorrow), and your genuine internal experiences. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 15:13:17 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 07:13:17 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question - Resolved References: <934976.15997.qm@web31007.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <03b901c87e01$98a7a5d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <005a01c88066$5f2aa930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> The question (See Below) is now entirely resolved. The answer was much along the lines that Jef had suggested. The load (showed as disconnected in a diagram) plays the decisive role. The ground holds one end of the 1K load resistor at 0V, and the emitter resistor's low end is held at -10V, and that creates a voltage divider. So the emitter can never go more negative than half way between (since each is a 1K resistor). Thus the emitter can go no lower than -5V, though when the base swings above -5V, more current is drawn from that "-5V point" and it rises too. Thanks to Bryan, Jef, Stathis, and Ed McHale, and also to some fine folks at sci.electronics.basic, who got it through my thick head that the ground symbol always stands for 0V in such a circuit, regardless of any higher or lower "rails". Sorry for the off-topic post, and apologies for having not quite correctly conveyed all the particulars. Lee >> The bottom of the diagram is at -10 volts and the top is at >> +10 volts (i.e. a 20volt supply somewhere). Just above the >> -10 volts is a 1K resistor, and above that the emitter of an >> NPN transistor. There is no resistor between the collector >> and the +10 volts. The experiment is to let the base voltage >> (input) vary between +10 and -10. The output is taken >> (hence "emitter-follower") at the top of the 1K resistor. >> >> Because the base-emitter voltage is always around .6 volts, >> the output naturally follows the input, but at .6 volts less. >> >> But the book says that when the input voltage drops down >> to -4.4 volts, the base-emitter junction gets back-biased, >> (and the transistor turns off?). I don't understand why the >> voltage on the base cannot keep going down, say to -6V, >> with the output voltage continuing to keep in step, say at >> -6.6. Even at -6 volts, there seems to me to be plenty >> of leeway between that and the -10V source below it. >> >> Here is their explanation: >> >> "The output can swing to within a transistor saturation >> voltage drop of VCC (about +9.9v) but it cannot go >> more negative than -5 volts. That is because on the >> extreme negative swing the transistor can do no more >> than turn off, which it does at -4.4 volts input (-5V >> output). Further netgative swing at the input results in >> back-biasing of the base-emitter juntion, but no further >> change in output." From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 16:08:42 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 08:08:42 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Devastated ideologies (was: italian politics as exi-chat subject) In-Reply-To: <200803070006.25671.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803060053o7a7bef83t13eb017b3249126a@mail.gmail.com> <200803061735.51526.kanzure@gmail.com> <200803070006.25671.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > > But on the other hand, we have significantly > > > large organizations ("Left" and "Right") and ideologies still > > > propagating and still abducting new minds even though there's no > > > real power that is necessarily making news releases to gain eyes > > > and get possible neophytes to convert (peculiar). > > > > Strange statement, considering the obvious and massive power > > structures within society which seem to be doing just that. > > Hm. You're right. I'd rather refine my observation to point out that > they are running on their own inertia of (even human) self-replication, > to apply your terms. Otherwise there is no legitimate reason > to 'convert' to Rightism or Leftism as far as I can tell. It seems you're saying that the major political power structures identified generally as "Right" and "Left" are proceeding mainly on their momentum from past efforts. I would disagree with this on the basis that (1) I see **a lot** of human initiative, energy and creativity being applied to these causes, and to a lesser extent, (2) these particular organizational alignments are very much tools of the individual humans, with little or no agency at the level of the organization itself. It seems also that you're conflating the previous point with the observation that despite all the apparent activity, it's pretty much "business as usual", with the existing power structures working more to strengthen their capacity for self-preservation (in terms of their existing values) than strengthening their capacity for increasingly effective adaptation (on behalf of their evolving values.) If this is your intended point, then I would agree it's an important one, applicable to all levels of intentional organization. The US military is already tipping in this direction, as are a few corporations, but systems which are predominately bottom-up driven, e.g. "ideal democracy", remain fundamentally limited to the slower rate of "trial and error" first-order evolutionary growth. > > [Insert Arrow of Morality here, with talk of increasing coherence > > over an increasing context of values, promoted by increasingly > > effective (scientific) means...] > > I'd like you to comment on the personal coherency arrow versus the > social coherency arrow, I mentioned this either in this thread or > another earlier today and think it would help here. (Ah, it looks like > you did in the next snippit. But I still remember something else I > mentioned today?) It is interesting to note that 'personal' can > encompass society (just as I can potentially encompass an entire botnet > or 18 wheeler to some extent, or perhaps grow and spawn enough people > to make a society) but the reverse -- where society makes for myself -- > does not work. (Chicken/egg?) I think the key to this is in recognizing that "personal", implying "self", refers to one's own perceived locus of agency, rather than referring to any particular form or size of organizational structure. It seems that you've got that much, when you suggest that one could self-identify "as an 18-wheeler." I don't understand what you mean by "..the reverse -- where society makes for myself..." > > Diversity is essential to evolutionary growth, accelerating with > > selection via an increasingly evolved environment. > > How is it that isolation engenders diversity? The point was in response to your question about the role of individual development within the large social environment leading to ongoing growth. To start, consider ecological niches. Consider "hybrid vigor." In the bigger picture, consider the necessary role of gradients in any (dynamic) process, and how in evolutionary processes a supply of diversity is necessary but not sufficient for ongoing adaptation. - Jef From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 16:19:47 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:19:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof In-Reply-To: <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> Message-ID: <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 2:51 PM, scerir wrote: > Giulio, while the specific 'querelle' may be off-topic, > isn't off topic here - at least imo - the *compatibility* > between the Extropian Principles and what Stefano wrote, > or writes. > I think it is not so easy, for our f?hrer, to check this > compatibility since Stefano wrote (I guess) in Italian, > and even the 'Manifesto' is not translated in English. > The Manifesto will be. As for my writings and/or thoughts, I have already made myself available to provide all the clarifications and details required to any third party with a good-faith curiosity or interest. In fact, I am understandably keen to make them as well-known as possible. :-) On the other hand, I think that my contributions to this list can and should be judged based on what I say and do as a subscriber thereof, which can be judged by anyone every day. I have myself for instance the sincerest doubts on the "compatibility" of what the extreme-right preacher self-baptised as Fabio Estropico writes in his blog with extropism, not to mention with other more encompassing rules such as Italian law; but as long as the relevant statements are not repeated here, I do not see what relevance such a "compatibility" may have for the list. By all means, I can find worse on the Web any time I care to look for it, and I am not paranoid of contamination if I happen to find myself on the same list with somebody whose opinons I consider deplorable and indefensible. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 16:30:00 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 08:30:00 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question - Resolved In-Reply-To: <005a01c88066$5f2aa930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <934976.15997.qm@web31007.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <03b901c87e01$98a7a5d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <005a01c88066$5f2aa930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 7:13 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > The question (See Below) is now entirely resolved. The answer > was much along the lines that Jef had suggested. The load > (showed as disconnected in a diagram) plays the decisive > role. Ah, if only more interesting issues could be so explicitly and completely defined in these forums. - Jef From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 16:40:30 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 08:40:30 -0800 Subject: [ExI] =?windows-1252?q?The_Monkey_Experiment=2C_=28or=29_=93Why_D?= =?windows-1252?q?o_We_Do_That=3F=94?= Message-ID: Apropos certain trends in discussion. From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 7 17:00:16 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:00:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] [Fwd: AGI Mailing List [WAS Re: The AGI and limiting it]] Message-ID: <47D174A0.2000009@lightlink.com> I just realized that this message of mine, which I intended to send to the list, only went to the person who wrote to me offlist, so here it is. [name omitted] wrote: >> Richard Loosemore> You will find that a much broader and more vigorous >> discussion of AI >> safety issues has been taking place on the AGI mailing list for some >> time now. > > Could you please give me some directions to this AGI mailing list? I > can't seem to find it. There actually two close lists, both organized by AGIRI.org: the "AGI" list and the "Singularity" list. Both of these can be found at http://www.agiri.org/email/. As a historical aside, the Singularity list was formed precisely because of the attacks made against me on the SL4 list in August 2006, which resulted in a great deal of dissatisfaction with the dictatorial policies of the SL list. When I made a move to set up an alternative to SL4, Ben Goertzel quickly stepped in and formed yet another alternative, and eventually everyone drifted to the AGI/Singularity combination. AGI is supposed to be about technical discussion of AGI, but in practice many people belong to both lists because they are hosted together, so discussions of singularity-related topics tend to appear as much on the AGI list as on the Singularity list. (Not that I want to encourage this, but it is a fact). If you are interested in the friendliness question in particular, I am in the process of collecting my writings on the subject, to put them in more permanent form on my blog. I will post a link to this blog when it is set up. (I know I am always saying that ;-), but I work from crisis to crisis, so there is always one more important thing for me to do... ). Richard Loosemore From max at maxmore.com Fri Mar 7 17:05:30 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 11:05:30 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <215844.1513.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> <215844.1513.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20080307170533.WJQK11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> At 12:51 AM 3/7/2008, Anne wrote: >If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* >important to him or her, but still manages heroism, I was/am leaving completely open the issue of how much value is at risk and its source. MM Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 7 17:15:01 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:15:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <009601c8804d$28213080$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <47D0AEE4.9090705@lightlink.com> <009601c8804d$28213080$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <47D17815.4050206@lightlink.com> Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > Richard Loosemore> Unfortunately, I think I was not clear enough, and as a > result you have >> misunderstood what I said in rather a substantial way. >> When you build an AGI, you *must* sort out the motivation mechanism >> ahead of time, or the machine will simply not work at all. You don't >> build an AGI and *then* discover what its motivation is. > > Let me throw more wood into the fire then. > I am not afraid of AGIs at all. But let's imagine a scenario where some > humans begin to worship the AGI as some sort of deity (yes, humans can be > that messed up). A sect could quickly evolve around the AGI and THAT is > something I consider dangerous. Not the AGI itself, but those possible post > modern religious fanatics. The difference between these new fanatics and the > present day fanatics that we all know and don't love is that their god > really exists (I'm sure there's already some distopic scifi novel that has > already addressed this issue). I think there is a difficulty here, which has to do with the context in which you assume an AGI to exist. Without going into details, the context is what 100% determines whether this scenario (a) could happen, (b) is likely to happen, and (c) would be a problem even if it did happen. The reason I say this is that I have thought about the future timeline of an AGI arrival, and I think that the overwhelming majority of possible futures involve situations in which this AGI-worship scenario would not be a problem. Because of my analysis, therefore, it is hard to answer your question. I think this kind of problem (where different people make wildly different assumptions about the context in which an AGI would arise) is at the root of many discussions and misunderstandings. I suppose what that means is that we have to spend more time examining possible-futures scenarios. Richard Loosemore From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 7 17:29:50 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 11:29:50 -0600 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307112542.0248a4d8@satx.rr.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > A sect could quickly evolve around the AGI and THAT > is something I consider dangerous. Not the AGI itself, but those > possible post modern religious fanatics. The difference between these > new fanatics and the present day fanatics that we all know and don't > love is that their god really exists (I'm sure there's already some > distopic scifi novel that has already addressed this issue). As it chances, I've just started reading the first sequel by D. F. Jones to THE FORBIN PROJECT (filmed in 1970 as the quite striking COLOSSUS), THE FALL OF COLOSSUS (1974), where exactly this is postulated. And it is, indeed, called the Sect. Damien Broderick From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 17:39:53 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 18:39:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Small H+ success stories Message-ID: <580930c20803070939l4ae29e0dv4276f7f7fb05d4e2@mail.gmail.com> Speaking of the failed referendum for the abrogation of the Italian prohibitionist law on IFV, cloning and genetic engineering, on Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Amara Graps wrote on the ExI chat list: > From: "Stefano Vaj" > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > > > I think it's important for Transhumanists to understand: > >> Why too few votes? Why couldn't that referendum gather 50%? Can you > >> answer? > > > >Mmhhh. Lack of information? Censorship by mainstream media? Cultural > >limits? Insufficient mobilisation or blatant betrayal of the forces > >who should theoretically have supported the referendum? Fear of the > >swinging catholic 4-5% in the upcoming elections ? The > >clever presentation of the law by its supporters as something > >concerning only couples with fertility problems (in fact it forbids > >almost all kinds of human reproductive or genetic technology)? > > Thank you for these examples. It's quite a list. These are the > challenges of yours and AITs and the Italian transhumanists wouldn't you > say? > ... > Your other examples (which depend on education, pure research funding, > political agendas, the Vatican's influence in Italy's politics) have > similar (IMO insurmountable) challenges. Yet, from time to time one finds himself in the position to make a little difference, and that encourages me to think that one should "keep up the good fight" and do whatever he can wherever he can, including in Italy, a country admittedly not devoid of problems. In fact, as mentioned another time, I was honoured by the appointment by the Lombardy Parliament, in my capacity of a jurist of some reputation, as one of the five "wise man" instructed to draft a (kind of) constitution for Lombardy itself, called Statuto. Since Italy recently embarked in a slightly more federally-oriented reforn of its governance, single administrative regions were to implement such charts reflecting both their enlarged powers and their basic ruling principles; and Lombardy - which, it is worth remembering, has more economic weight and population than several entire EU member countries - was one of the last not having done so yet. This experience has been of great professional interest, since practising lawyers draft contracts much more frequently than constitutions, and scholars usually comment upon them rather than contributing to their wording. But besides that I obviously took all the opportunities to pepper generously the proposed constitutional bill with H+ memes and spins in at least a dozen of places, even though, strictly speaking, I should not have any say regarding the political or philosophical orientation of the constitution, an aspect that was obviously reserved to elected representatives. :-) Of course, I never expected much of that to survive to parliamentary vagaries, not to mention, more importantly, to the reactions of the much-courted, swinging-vote teocons in both the right-wing majority and the left-wing opposition (those in the latter call themselves "teodem", but the difference is often very subtle). Add to that the deep inroads of explicitely neo-luddite, "deep ecology", environmentalism in an equally well-represented and vocal extreme left, and the least I can I say is that knee-jerk rejections of anything vaguely sounding H+ were to be taken for granted. I am however happy to report that more than a few "little things" managed to survive, namely in the two following important provisions: "Art. 2 ... In particular, in the framework of its powers, the Lombardy Region: ... e) shall promote the preconditions to make effective the freedom of religion, of thought, of speech, of teaching, of research, as well as the access to communication media" (In particolare, nell'ambito delle sue competenze, la Regione:... e) promuove le condizioni per rendere effettiva la libert? religiosa, di pensiero, di parola, di insegnamento, di educazione, di ricerca, nonch? l'accesso ai mezzi di comunicazione;) "Art. 10 - Research and Innovation. 1. The Lombardy Region recognises the leading and central role of the scientific research and of innovation for the achievement of its goals in all the fields of economic and social life, and shall strives to exploit to the maximum possible degree its potential, in cooperation with universities, research centres, and the techno-scientific and professional communities. 2. The Lombardy Region shall value, promote and support technological, scientific and industrial innovations, investments and initiatives in the field of fundamental and applied research, as well as everything else that is required to achieve results of excellence in those areas, including the aspects pertaining to the reaching of decisions and the related information. ..." (Ricerca e innovazione 1. La Regione riconosce il ruolo centrale e trainante della ricerca scientifica e dell'innovazione per il conseguimento dei propri obiettivi in tutte le sfere della vita economica e sociale e opera per valorizzarne al massimo grado il potenziale, in collaborazione e dialogo con le universit?, i centri di ricerca, le comunit? tecnico-scientifiche e professionali. 2. La Regione valorizza, promuove e incentiva l'innovazione tecnica, scientifica e produttiva, gli investimenti e le iniziative nel campo della ricerca di base e applicata, nonch? quanto necessario al raggiungimento di risultati di eccellenza in tali ambiti, ivi compresi gli aspetti attinenti la formazione delle decisioni e la loro divulgazione.) Needless to say, those are mere programmatic points, and as usually the devil will be in their actual implementation (if any!); but their enactment in such an explicit form is already far from trivial in the Italian political, social and cultural context. And I am proud to say that, at the very least, from now on, whenever those principles will come into discussion, Italian transhumanists will be in a position to make reference to an official document of constitutional relevance in our legal system. Stefano Vaj From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 7 18:22:51 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:22:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] =?iso-8859-1?q?_Re=3A__The_Monkey_Experiment=2C_=28or=29_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=93Why_Do_We_Do__That=3F=94?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307121657.02528ec8@satx.rr.com> At 08:40 AM 3/7/2008 -0800, Jef wrote: >Apropos certain trends in discussion. > > and apropos another recent discussion (hi, John Grigg!), it even ends: Like what you've seen? Share it! Send this page to a friend This looks just like the kind of "frog in boiling water" fable that sounds illuminating but is invented: http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.htm These gullible peer group-driven monkeys are all over the web, btw; snopes doesn't seem to have investigated the story yet, but I'd be more ready to believe it if there'd been some documentation attached... Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 7 18:32:34 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:32:34 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com><470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com><009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Myself, I do happen to be something of an ideological partisan, (I'm trying to get better :-)), but my real interest in following this thread---to the meagre effort that I have been able to---is to see a reflection in another country/culture of the same issues that divide us here. So as painful as it may be for Giulio and perhaps some others, could they ingore the messages a bit longer, perhaps? For example, Stephano (who I would have said is quite a right winger---we may ideologically agree on quite a few things, he and I) writes as follows: Stephano writes > On the other hand, I think that my contributions to this list can and > should be judged based on what I say and do as a subscriber thereof, Sure. > which can be judged by anyone every day. I have myself for instance > the sincerest doubts on the "compatibility" of what the extreme-right > preacher self-baptised as Fabio Estropico... This, for example, totally baffles me. In America, Stephano would be considered "extreme-right wing". So how can Fabio be also described in these terms? What would be utterly ideal would be a table the rows of which would be issues, and the columns of which would be Estropico, Stephano, and Fabio (or whoever). Then I could see who really was "right wing" (or "left wing" or "fascist") and thus what these terms mean in Italy and in the Italian Transhumanist movement. I can't be the only one who sees potential value in our Italian friends holding up a mirror for us in the west, but whose reflection perhaps has much potential for helping us even understand ourselves. Thanks, Lee From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 19:04:26 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 11:04:26 -0800 Subject: [ExI] =?windows-1252?q?The_Monkey_Experiment=2C_=28or=29_=93Why_D?= =?windows-1252?q?o_We_Do_That=3F=94?= In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307121657.02528ec8@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307121657.02528ec8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:22 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > This looks just like the kind of "frog in boiling water" fable that > sounds illuminating but is invented: > http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.htm Yeah, as far as I can tell it's just a story, popular within change-management circles, but I think it provides a useful contrast illustrating how far transhumanists have already come in terms of enlightened inquiry and discussion, attacking problems rather than each other. - Jef From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 19:32:35 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:32:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200803061836.49412.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803011724.38240.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803020746i1f70e497u8bbedafdd7d9ef3b@mail.gmail.com> <200803061836.49412.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803071132i4862cca1h93b3e6bdba8d484f@mail.gmail.com> Hi Bryan, I enjoyed the exchange of ideas. I'd be curious to know where you will be standing on these issues in ten or twenty years, considering you are currently a very young man. > > > The "amazing cultural phenomena" you describe, if it turns against > > you (stem cell research vrs. the Bush Administration, for instance), > > results in a definite slowing or stopping of potentially life saving > > medical technology. > The only way they can do that is by jailing us in prisons. > >>> Most researchers don't want to go to that extreme to protest things. Instead, they simply don't do the controversial research or else move to a nation where it is allowed/encouraged. And that nation then reaps the benefits. > > > And even though the research and development would continue in other > > nations, the U.S. would then be at a serious disadvantage to be a > > leader in the biotech field and reap the financial harvest. And > > remember that it's just plain "un-American" to not make tons of money > > and dominate technological progress! lol > > Heh, well, with self-replication there might be a collapse of the > financial institutions, but not if they play their cards right. So > that's something that somebody might want to put some thought into. > >>> In the name of national security (and the unspoken desire of corporations to keep their stranglehold on the economy) we will see the possibility of nanotech "anything boxes" most likely squelched. "We can't take the chance of bad people hacking into them and doing who knows what!" "Why, just go to your local Nano Mart store and they will set you right up..." > > > you continue: > > > No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility does > > > not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they can > > > protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to burn us > > > alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over the > > > internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It will route > > > around the damage. > > > > But warring against research labs and those who fund them in another > > matter, entirely. It generally takes serious money and disciplined > > scientific teams to tease out Mother Nature's secrets. > > Nah, it just takes discipline. That's the whole discipline of science. > It does not take money, but rather the raw resources. The guys that > build particle accelerators and energy stations? They had the > discipline to make it happen even when there wasn't necessarily > a "plutonium economy" or "electricity economy" when they started off. > >>> > The guys who built the particle accelerators and energy stations got big hunks of money from government and corporate sponsors. They had the discipline to gather the grant money that got things accomplished. > > > of global competitiveness. And by the time we try to really turn > > things around we may have lost some critical advantages that might > > never be fully regained. > > Maybe. Can you own an advantage, even in natural-evolutionary terms? > >>> > What the U.S. and Western world might have are certain given educational and social foundations that make technological catch up much easier on us as compared to China or Russia. > > > In terms of national security (and economic strength is a foundation > > of military strength) and a having a powerful and effective armed > > forces, the U.S. in my view needs to be much more careful in terms of > > who does scientific research in our labs and who can gain access to > > our technological trade secrets. I think we should only let in > > foreign nationals that are from nations which do not have longterm > > plans to take our spot as the definitive world superpower. I cringe > > to think of all the knowledge & power which is leaked out to > > potentially hostile foreign competitors because we are so dependent > > on researchers not from our native country. > > What knowledge and power? What does the military have that cannot be > already duplicated? Airplanes? Easily duplicated (though not > necessarily the money to make many tests. This is of course a matter of > resources, not money.) Nuclear weapons? Non-military persons came up > with nukes. Navy machinery? Easy enough. > >>> > Knowledge IS power. Academic and corporate research labs are spread across the U.S. and the backbone of much military and economic r & d. Yes, non-military people came up with much of this. lol By the way, resources and money go hand in hand. : ) A "standard" and non-high performance jet fighter, tank, missle cruiser, civilian product for sale, etc. may be relatively easy to create, but designing and manufacturing a very advanced (superior to potential enemies/competitors) version is a great challenge. Rival nations will have a very challenging time matching our most advanced tech (and as they try to catch up we would be moving forward to stay ahead) unless the complete designs and manufacturing methods are stolen. Espionage/stolen military and industrial secrets are a huge problem for the U.S. and the rest of the Western world. > > > We are in a race to develop whatever the next generation of > > technological innovations are that we must have to stay not just > > competitive, but ahead of the rest of the world. And yes, we do have > > This is FUD. This is THE REAL WORLD. lol > > > > our top secret military labs that surely have incredible security and > > well vetted researchers, but the tech that feeds those places comes > > generally from corporate and academic America. It will be carefully > > nurtured and protected technological progress that will maintain our > > economic strength, and this must be protected every bit as much as > > some state of the art new weapons system. > > Fud, fud, fud. >>> If the U.S. does not protect it's technology base by better security, improving public education, etc., you will see in your lifetime our steep decline. It will be a very sad thing. > > > > Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can cause > > It is also more fud. > >>> > It can be at times. But do you really think other powerful nations always have our best interests at heart? lol Life is not just cooperation but also competition. Nature teaches us that. And it still holds true for humanity. > > > healthy competition among developed nations to make rapid progress in > > key technologies that would potentially change our lives for the > > better. I am very grateful for this (would you want a powerful world > > government that had a negative view of biotech research and passed > > laws in effect *everywhere* to enforce their stance?, lol) But on > > the other hand, nationalism can cause extreme over-competitiveness, > > which leads to wars, both cold and hot. > Hey, I agree with this guy! ; ) > > > Btw, I apologize for not getting back to this soon enough. I forgot > about it. :) > > - Bryan > >>> > No problem! Best wishes, John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 20:01:22 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:01:22 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Lee Corbin> I agree. But "simulation" is ambiguous, I've always said. A very, very > good actor (especially if he's a superhuman AI), might simulate you > just fine, fooling all your friends and relatives. In other words, this > god-like being is just pulling the strings on a puppet. Unfortunately, > that counts as a successful simulation of you on some usages of the > term. > But to *emulate* you means that something really is you, just as one > operating system may emulate another. I didn't make this distinction > above when I first wrote, due to shortage of space. A successful > upload emulates you perfectly, has your thoughts and feelings (or, > perhaps the ones you may have tomorrow), and your genuine > internal experiences. But with an emulation, the uploading proccess is some kind of "make a copy and destroy (probably) the original". Then the uploaded me would not be me. It would just be something that thinks it's me. The "me" must be transferred to the "new me", not copied, more like uninstalling my software and installing it somewhere else. From pharos at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 20:36:18 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:36:18 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy In-Reply-To: <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > This, for example, totally baffles me. In America, Stephano would be > considered "extreme-right wing". So how can Fabio be also described > in these terms? What would be utterly ideal would be a table the > rows of which would be issues, and the columns of which would be > Estropico, Stephano, and Fabio (or whoever). Then I could see > who really was "right wing" (or "left wing" or "fascist") and thus what > these terms mean in Italy and in the Italian Transhumanist movement. > > I can't be the only one who sees potential value in our Italian friends > holding up a mirror for us in the west, but whose reflection perhaps > has much potential for helping us even understand ourselves. I doubt if our USA friends would find much value in the intricate postmodern European political factions. Interesting? Possibly, like poking a stick into an anthill and watching all the frantic scurrying around. BRIAN: Are you the Judean People's Front? REG: Judean People's Front. We're the People's Front of Judea! Judean People's Front. Cawk. REG: Right. You're in. Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front. JUDITH: Splitters. FRANCIS: And the Judean Popular People's Front. P.F.J.: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Splitters. Splitters... LORETTA: And the People's Front of Judea. P.F.J.: Yeah. Splitters. Splitters... REG: What? LORETTA: The People's Front of Judea. Splitters. REG: We're the People's Front of Judea! LORETTA: Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front. REG: People's Front! C-huh. FRANCIS: Whatever happened to the Popular Front, Reg? REG: He's over there. P.F.J.: Splitter! 'Life of Brian' Monty Python BillK From ABlainey at aol.com Fri Mar 7 20:40:32 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:40:32 EST Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? Message-ID: In a message dated 07/03/2008 02:57:47 GMT Standard Time, rpwl at lightlink.com writes: > Unfortunately, I think I was not clear enough, and as a result you have > misunderstood what I said in rather a substantial way. > More than likely, it was late and I think my view of your post was clouded by reading previous posts. On reading it again I would agree that my response wasn't quite in line with it, but I think we may disagree on some issues. > When you build an AGI, you *must* sort out the motivation mechanism > ahead of time, or the machine will simply not work at all. You don't > build an AGI and *then* discover what its motivation is. > Agreed in principle. However I still subscribe to the idea that the end result AGI will have unpredictable motivation regardless of it's starting point. I'll say again that the development is a stochastic process unless we code every single line by hand, spoon feed its knowledge base and fully understand all possible outcomes of the system to the Nth degree. This is unrealistic and impossible to achieve even in today's Non-AI software let alone in developing an AGI. Imagine a self learning Windows! > If you do not understand the motivation system before you build it, then > it will not work, as simple as that. Agreed. But as above, we cannot know in advance what the AGI will decide to do even if we can control its motivations. > > The reason why many people do talk as if a future AGI will have a > "surprise" motivation system is that today's AI systems are driven by > extremely crude and non-scalable "goal-stack" control systems, which are > great for narrow-AI planning tasks, but which become extremely unstable > when we imagine using them in a full-blown AGI. > > But when people imagine an extended form of goal-stack drive system > controlling a future AGI, they fail to realise that the very same > instability that makes the AGI seem so threatening will also make it so > unstable that it will never actually become generally intelligent. The methodology used to build the AI/AGI in the first place is irrelevant to the finished AGI. There are infinite ways to mathematically get from 1 to 100 and likewise infinite ways in which an AGI could rewrite its motivational code. Just because our ability to code AI is limited by preconceptions, personal aptitude, knowledge of coding and excepted methodology such as "goal-stack" control systems. Does not mean the AGI will follow our limited rules. So we cannot predict the outcome. > > The bottom line: you cannot make statements like "An ...[AGI]... could > and probably will do major damage", because there is no "probably" about > it. You either set out to make it do damage and be intelligent at the > same time (an extremely difficult combination, in practice, for reasons > I have explained elsewhere), or you don't! There is no surprise. > The full quote ended with 'probably not through design or desire, but just through exploration of ability or pure accident,' which is the important bit. If my car is fitted with autobrakes which apply when closing on a stationary vehicle, they might not stop the car from running over a dog. The point being that any AGI must have explicit rules or ability to stop it doing something in order to be safe. If we give the AGI a basic motivation to 'learn all it can,' We must add an exception that it cannot learn what happens to humans when dropped into a vat of acid. We can overcome this to an extent by blanket rules, but the basic premise is still the same. If an AGI can cause damage, it will. I have seen first hand, many times what happens when AI systems come across situations where they have no explicit rules for the situation. I once watched (from a distance) a CNC machine throwing 3 metre steel bars across a workshop, simply because a part off tool broke. This was a very dangerous example of a very simple AI following an equally simple rule and nearly killing someone. As with an AGI, all I could do was stop and stare, then wait for the dust to settle. > For someone to talk about discovering an AGI's motivation after the fact > would be like a company building a supersonic passenger jet and then > speculating about whether the best way to fly it is nose-forward or > nose-backward. > > > > Richard Loosemore > The jet could not reconfigure its aerodynamics after assemble, if it could, perhaps it would fly better backwards ;o) What's more, many planes are already aerodynamically capable of flying backwards. But that's a whole different fishkettle. Ask a group of well educated pilots what makes a plane fly and you would be surprised at the answers LOL. Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 7 20:40:52 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:40:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Stefano Vaj: >On the other hand, I am very glad to report that a few little things >managed to survive that are not so trivial in the Italian cultural, >legal and political landscape, namely in the following provisions: [...] OK. And I wrote my next sentence: This is a start, but you know implementation of any law in Italy is often another story: http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2008/02/21/foreign-students-and-researchers-may-come-to-italy-again/ before I read your next paragraph: >Sure, we are talking of purely programmatic points, and the devils >will as usually be in the implementation (if any...) of the >"principles" above. So we agree that the implementation is a key point. Amara P.S. I didn't see that the particulars of Legge 40 were discussed in your provisions. Was it not discussed? -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 7 21:24:06 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:24:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists Message-ID: Riccardo Campa riccardo.campa at gmail.com : 2008/3/7, Amara Graps amara at amara.com: >> This is a start, but you know implementation of any law in Italy is >> often another story: >And since you are libertarian, you should be happy about it. :D I'm not sure what is your point Riccardo. I met only one libertarian in Italy during the entire five years I lived there (and he lives in Australia now). My question regarding what has changed or what has been discussed regarding Legge 40 is an important one, however. That law certainly affected me and my decisions for (not) building a life in Italy, and also affected the lives and decisions for building the lives of a number of other Italian researchers I knew. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From estropico at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 21:54:07 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 21:54:07 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803071354g2c5fbe33o28dca1957585ce70@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > > To the attention of the list moderator(s): as a subscriber I am > beginning to find this exchange very boring and very far from the > content that I wish to read here. This has been said by many others if > I am not mistaken. Could somebody please issue a reminder to all > participants in this off-topic thread. I'd just ike to point out that Giulio's request is not just that of a simple subscriber to the list. As a member of the Italian Transhumanist Association's "national council", of which Stefano Vaj is also a member, he might well have a vested interest in closing down this conversation. Cheers, Fabio From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 21:56:03 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:56:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > But with an emulation, the uploading proccess is some kind of "make a copy > and destroy (probably) the original". Then the uploaded me would not be me. > It would just be something that thinks it's me. The "me" must be transferred > to the "new me", not copied, more like uninstalling my software and > installing it somewhere else. Oh no! Not again! ;-) - Jef From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 7 22:35:57 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:35:57 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307163316.05b95d90@satx.rr.com> At 01:56 PM 3/7/2008 -0800, Jef wrote: >On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado > wrote: > > > But with an emulation, the uploading proccess is some kind of "make a copy > > and destroy (probably) the original". Then the uploaded me would > not be me. > > It would just be something that thinks it's me. The "me" must be > transferred > > to the "new me", not copied, more like uninstalling my software and > > installing it somewhere else. > >Oh no! Not again! ;-) You might fear that this is an ancient undead thread being reinstalled, but it's not--it's an entirely new emulation that just *thinks* it's the old thread. Damien Broderick From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 7 22:42:25 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:42:25 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307163316.05b95d90@satx.rr.com> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <7.0.1.0.2.20080307163316.05b95d90@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > At 01:56 PM 3/7/2008 -0800, Jef wrote: > > >On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado > > wrote: > > > > > But with an emulation, the uploading proccess is some kind of "make a copy > > > and destroy (probably) the original". Then the uploaded me would > > not be me. > > > It would just be something that thinks it's me. The "me" must be > > transferred > > > to the "new me", not copied, more like uninstalling my software and > > > installing it somewhere else. > > > >Oh no! Not again! ;-) > > You might fear that this is an ancient undead thread being > reinstalled, but it's not--it's an entirely new emulation that just > *thinks* it's the old thread. > Alrighty then. At least it's not the same old thread experiencing multiple run times. - Jef From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 7 13:51:32 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:51:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <8CA4E717C903AA9-E24-4442@WEBMAIL-MA04.sysops.aol.com> I find this discussion on transhumanism a good exercise for the brain matter between scientists and philosophers. Memes of heroism without self-sacrifice feed on man's curiosity to learn everything to know about the self. AGI works on the self to adapt to change not the other way around. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 7 14:52:35 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:52:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] We are Change re: Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <8CA4E7A03A14CE1-494-1D0@WEBMAIL-MA04.sysops.aol.com> "Hi, exercising the brain muscle/energy, we are all energies in varied forms of change so where is the self among these dancing electrons, atoms and molecules? Ideas of self and no-self are movements of the mind, the electrochemical interactions within the brain matter in response to stimuli/change. Heroism without self-sacrifice is a belief on a permanent self or no-self. Terry {Zen practitioner} From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 23:00:52 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:00:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy In-Reply-To: <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > For example, Stephano (who I would have said is quite a right > winger---we may ideologically agree on quite a few things, he > and I) writes as follows: Happy that we share some views, even though I prefer to consider myself as an upwinger. In fact, my main concern as far as "positioning" is concerned is to keep myself as far from teocons as possible :-); but if, say, Nietzsche or Marinetti or Huxley or Heinlein should be considered as being right-wing, well, so be it, I have no intention whatsoever to renounce to what of interest I may find in their writings out of political correctness or fear of ideological terrorism. At the same time, I am surprised that, while the usual couple of Italian supporters of Mr. Bush's crusades try to disqualify my ideas with the ritual personal association with fascism ("I hear that you love the animals, Hitler used to have a dog, now I do not mean to imply anything, but...") some other people put me disparagingly in a league with James Hughes and Dale Carrico, who are not normally considered in the H+ world as really being right-wingers of any description... I think that it would be best to recognise that old labels may end up being of limited use in an era of revolutionary change, to go back to Korzybski's idea that the map is not the territory, and concentrate instead on ideas and new syntheses thereof. Stefano Vaj From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 7 23:01:28 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:01:28 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof In-Reply-To: <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> Message-ID: <200803072301.m27N1XKF009021@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir > Subject: Re: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged > relevance thereof > > Giu1i0 scrive: > > To the attention of the list moderator(s): as a subscriber I am > > beginning to find this exchange very boring and very far from the > > content that I wish to read here... > Giulio, while the specific 'querelle' may be off-topic, isn't > off topic here - at least imo - the *compatibility* between > the Extropian Principles and what Stefano wrote, or writes. ... > But I can agree: this stuff is boring. > -serafino Decision: I will let this stand for now, no killthread. Boring is allowed, for some may be interested. Everyone please keep it civil (as you have, thanks) and feel free to use the delete button early and often. Review of decision in a couple days, sooner if participants start flaming each other. spike From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 7 23:30:44 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:30:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <20080307170533.WJQK11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <200803072331.m27NUmNA010997@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More > Subject: Re: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice > > At 12:51 AM 3/7/2008, Anne wrote: > > >If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* > >important to him or her, but still manages heroism, > > I was/am leaving completely open the issue of how much value > is at risk and its source... MM When I read Max's challenge, I thought of those who invent things that create enormous wealth, motivated entirely by profit. In our world, most of those people have been software developers, ja? Think of the development of spreadsheets and how much they have done for us. Probably everyone here uses them for something, and many of us have mastered the subtleties, macro languages etc. Excel is probably my most important single engineering tool, enabling many other inventions. Remember the old days, when Visicalc first showed up? When was that, about 1979? 1980? Wasn't that the coolest thing we had ever seen? Then Lotus and Microsloth carried the idea and ran with it. One can scarcely imagine how much wealth was created as a result of Visicalc and its direct descendants. Are not Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston perfect examples of heroes motivated by profit? Thanks Dan and Bob. You deserve techno-sainthood. spike From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 23:35:56 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:35:56 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803071132i4862cca1h93b3e6bdba8d484f@mail.gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803061836.49412.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803071132i4862cca1h93b3e6bdba8d484f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803071735.56155.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > Hi Bryan, I enjoyed the exchange of ideas. I'd be curious to know > where you will be standing on these issues in ten or twenty years, > considering you are currently a very young man. And am I to call you very old? > > > The "amazing cultural phenomena" you describe, if it turns > > > against you (stem cell research vrs. the Bush Administration, for > > > instance), results in a definite slowing or stopping of > > > potentially life saving medical technology. > > > > The only way they can do that is by jailing us in prisons. > > Most researchers don't want to go to that extreme to protest things. Didn't I already reply to this only a few days ago? If you can't stand the heat (the risk), then get out of the kitchen and make sure people know that you are calling yourself what you don't want to really be. > Instead, they simply don't do the controversial research or else move > to a nation where it is allowed/encouraged. And that nation then > reaps the benefits. The only reason nations reap benefits is because of the locality of the person, but in our age of travel and communication, locality is not as an important factor as before, but still important, yeah. > > > And even though the research and development would continue in > > > other nations, the U.S. would then be at a serious disadvantage > > > to be a leader in the biotech field and reap the financial > > > harvest. And remember that it's just plain "un-American" to not > > > make tons of money and dominate technological progress! lol > > > > Heh, well, with self-replication there might be a collapse of the > > financial institutions, but not if they play their cards right. So > > that's something that somebody might want to put some thought into. > > In the name of national security (and the unspoken desire of > corporations to keep their stranglehold on the economy) we will see > the possibility of nanotech "anything boxes" most likely squelched. You have nanotech (bacteria) all around you. And it's not squelched. > "We can't take the chance of bad people hacking into them and doing > who knows what!" "Why, just go to your local Nano Mart store and > they will set you right up..." So you think this fear will magically stop all life (nanotech)? > > > you continue: > > > > No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility > > > > does not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they > > > > can protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to > > > > burn us alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over > > > > the internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It > > > > will route around the damage. > > > > > > But warring against research labs and those who fund them in > > > another matter, entirely. It generally takes serious money and > > > disciplined scientific teams to tease out Mother Nature's > > > secrets. > > > > Nah, it just takes discipline. That's the whole discipline of > > science. It does not take money, but rather the raw resources. The > > guys that build particle accelerators and energy stations? They had > > the discipline to make it happen even when there wasn't necessarily > > a "plutonium economy" or "electricity economy" when they started > > off. > > The guys who built the particle accelerators and energy stations got > big hunks of money from government and corporate sponsors. They had > the discipline to gather the grant money that got things > accomplished. Ability to gather money does not indicate whether or not they can do it. > > > of global competitiveness. And by the time we try to really turn > > > things around we may have lost some critical advantages that > > > might never be fully regained. > > > > Maybe. Can you own an advantage, even in natural-evolutionary > > terms? > > What the U.S. and Western world might have are certain given > educational and social foundations that make technological catch up > much easier on us as compared to China or Russia. What? My question was whether you can 'own' an advantage in the game theoretic sense of natural evolution. Ownership and property has recently been discussed more thoroughly on the list, so naturally I see this as a relevant extension to those thoughts. > > What knowledge and power? What does the military have that cannot > > be already duplicated? Airplanes? Easily duplicated (though not > > necessarily the money to make many tests. This is of course a > > matter of resources, not money.) Nuclear weapons? Non-military > > persons came up with nukes. Navy machinery? Easy enough. > > Knowledge IS power. Academic and corporate research labs are spread > across the U.S. and the backbone of much military and economic r & d. No, people are the backbone, and what one human can think, so can another. > Yes, non-military people came up with much of this. lol By the way, > resources and money go hand in hand. : ) Resources and money do not go hand-in-hand. > A "standard" and non-high performance jet fighter, tank, missle > cruiser, civilian product for sale, etc. may be relatively easy to > create, but designing and manufacturing a very advanced (superior to > potential enemies/competitors) version is a great challenge. Rival I don't see how this is true. I have been studying how to make my own copy of the X-43A, the NASA Hyper-X hypersonic Mach 10 aircraft. As far as I can tell, the hardest part is just reading the documentation on the CFD simulators (heh), but then there's finding an artist to model the ship properly, then assembling the right metals and a cooling system, getting an oxyacetalone arc welder, doing the CNC metalworking, and most importantly the preliminary design work in coming up with the right PDEs and mission design parameters. The only thing *hard* is evolutionary progression of novelty. Anything else is not 'hard'. > nations will have a very challenging time matching our most advanced > tech (and as they try to catch up we would be moving forward to stay > ahead) unless the complete designs and manufacturing methods are Open source. > stolen. Espionage/stolen military and industrial secrets are a huge > problem for the U.S. and the rest of the Western world. Maybe they would do better to be able to exist in such a way that they do not entirely rely on such outdated security models? Secrets?? > > > We are in a race to develop whatever the next generation of > > > technological innovations are that we must have to stay not just > > > competitive, but ahead of the rest of the world. And yes, we do > > > have > > > > This is FUD. > > This is THE REAL WORLD. lol You can stay competitive even with shared knowledge, see OSS. > If the U.S. does not protect it's technology base by better security, > improving public education, etc., you will see in your lifetime our > steep decline. It will be a very sad thing. Decline in what? > > > Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can cause > > > > It is also more fud. > > It can be at times. But do you really think other powerful nations > always have our best interests at heart? lol Life is not just > cooperation but also competition. Nature teaches us that. And it > still holds true for humanity. What are you talking about? I didn't even mention 'nations' having best interests at heart etc. Specifically, you are promoting the concept of nationalism even when we know that we can make things and build solutions to our human problems, you are just pointing to archaic methods of cooperation whic hcan be surpassed. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 23:37:02 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:37:02 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Electronic Circuit Question - Resolved In-Reply-To: References: <934976.15997.qm@web31007.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <005a01c88066$5f2aa930$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803071737.02717.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > Ah, if only more interesting issues could be so explicitly and > completely defined in these forums. Perhaps not the issues themselves, but instead the method of studying them and the mental processes involved in hunting down the types of information that leads to such knowledge? That would certainly be extropic. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Fri Mar 7 23:36:38 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:36:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803071536g2a6309a3k3e104df28229a2e1@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I agree. But "simulation" is ambiguous, I've always said. A very, very > good actor (especially if he's a superhuman AI), might simulate you > just fine, fooling all your friends and relatives. In other words, this > god-like being is just pulling the strings on a puppet. Unfortunately, > that counts as a successful simulation of you on some usages of the > term. > > But to *emulate* you means that something really is you, just as one > operating system may emulate another. I didn't make this distinction > above when I first wrote, due to shortage of space. A successful > upload emulates you perfectly, has your thoughts and feelings (or, > perhaps the ones you may have tomorrow), and your genuine > internal experiences. > Sure. But I wonder whether after all the simulation in the first sense could ever be "perfect", and if the only way to make it perfect would not be to make it an emulation. This makes me think, for instance of the explanation by Dennett of how and why human beings may adopt behaviours that may be unfit in a Darwinian sense. The points is that if some genes want to get the kind of flexibility that we may offer them, they have to accept such a risk as well and accept some "autonomy" from their "whisper". Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 7 23:41:22 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:41:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Al Cafone (was: The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists) Message-ID: Mirco Romanato painlord2k at yahoo.it : >Would you tell us why Mr. Berlusconi deserve to be in jail? This is shorter ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trials_involving_Silvio_Berlusconi Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From aiguy at comcast.net Fri Mar 7 23:56:49 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 18:56:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Jef Allbright said: << Apropos certain trends in discussion. >> What a fantastic experiment! Thanks Jef! What a clear example of learned aggression. Bullies bully because they have been trained in aggression at a young age and repeat the behavior without even understanding why. I think assertiveness training needs to be a part of every child's schooling. It teaches the difference between being assertive and aggressive and teaches how not to be a victim or a bully. A few generations of this type of training and I think we could reduce abuse and violent crime dramatically. It would raise self-esteem in the members of our society who most need it and most probably reduce the divorce rates significantly as well when people understand how to communicate without being aggressive. I'm sure that some here are going to call this indoctrination not education, but let's face it, if our children aren't learning what they need to be happy, healthy and well adjusted at home, we owe it to them and ourselves to show them that they don't have to go through live constantly giving and receiving pain. It give me hope for the future that groups like the Boy Scouts are now offering merit badges for learning about bullying. Scouts are encouraged to speak out for and protect others they see being bullied. Since low self esteem has been found to cause other problems from eating disorders, to promiscuity, to drug and alcohol addiction many other positive benefits to society would accrue as well. And no I'm not so unrealistic to think that this will solve all of the violence, pain, abuse, crime and addiction in society. But it's a place to start! We can't just wait for the AGI to save us from ourselves. We need to take some first steps ourselves to show that we are worthy of surviving. descending from soapbox now... From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 00:06:14 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:06:14 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <200803072331.m27NUmNA010997@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <20080307170533.WJQK11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <200803072331.m27NUmNA010997@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803071606tfffd831ma1396c010c10f713@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:30 PM, spike wrote: > When I read Max's challenge, I thought of those who invent things that > create enormous wealth, motivated entirely by profit. In our world, most of > those people have been software developers, ja? Think of the development of > spreadsheets and how much they have done for us. Probably everyone here > uses them for something, and many of us have mastered the subtleties, macro > languages etc. Excel is probably my most important single engineering tool, > enabling many other inventions. > > Remember the old days, when Visicalc first showed up? When was that, about > 1979? 1980? Wasn't that the coolest thing we had ever seen? Then Lotus > and Microsloth carried the idea and ran with it. One can scarcely imagine > how much wealth was created as a result of Visicalc and its direct > descendants. Are not Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston perfect examples of > heroes motivated by profit? But where is the myth? Where are their stories of awful childhoods overcome, their overthrow of power-hungry politicians or whiny socialists by the sheer inevitability of their scrappy little technology, or the moment they reached their capitalistic apotheosis, deified on Mount Moola by God Greenspan on one side and Goddess Rand on the other? ;-) Will they be celebrated in song and story? Does anyone (other than you, Spike!) want to read books, see movies and tell gripping yarns years from now 'round the campfire about them? I sure don't. PJ From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 7 23:49:30 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:49:30 -0800 Subject: [ExI] injure thread: RE: Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803071354g2c5fbe33o28dca1957585ce70@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803080016.m280GEvm020866@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of estropico > Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance > > > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > > > > ...Could somebody please issue a reminder to all > > participants in this off-topic thread. > > I'd just ike to point out that Giulio's request is not just > that of a simple subscriber to the list. As a member of the > Italian Transhumanist Association's "national council", of > which Stefano Vaj is also a member, he might well have a > vested interest in closing down this conversation. Cheers, Fabio There are clearly subtleties of the politics in the Italian Transhumanist Association of which the rest of this list are unaware. For that reason, I for one, do not understand your last sentence. Do not feel the need to explain it to me however. On the contrary, feel free to let this thread perish at this point, for it has made me squirmy from the start, and is getting worse with each post I see. Each poster is judged only on the posts that person puts here. Accusations regarding anyone's political leanings outside this list are not welcome nor helpful. This isn't a killthread, but rather merely an injure thread. I am hoping it will limp away without my having to slay it outright. With any contrary opininons, you are welcome to post me offlist, thanks. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 8 00:20:33 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:20:33 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803071606tfffd831ma1396c010c10f713@mail.gmail.com > References: <20080307170533.WJQK11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <200803072331.m27NUmNA010997@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <29666bf30803071606tfffd831ma1396c010c10f713@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080307181906.0221d450@satx.rr.com> At 04:06 PM 3/7/2008 -0800, PJ wrote: >Will they be celebrated in song and story? Does anyone (other than >you, Spike!) want to read books, see movies and tell gripping yarns >years from now 'round the campfire about them? "Spreadsheet! Spreadsheet! Toot, toot! Read all about it on yer Daily Spreadsheet!" From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 00:21:11 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:21:11 +0000 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" In-Reply-To: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > > What a fantastic experiment! Thanks Jef! > > What a clear example of learned aggression. > Er.... This is a made-up story, actually. A parable, to teach a moral lesson. Nothing wrong with that, so long as you agree with the moral being taught. :) Lots more like that available here: Illustrations and analogies for motivation, inspiration, learning and training BillK From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 00:44:58 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:44:58 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <47D0E6A8.2030202@pobox.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <05ee01c88018$b9b2eaa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803062235y1d43ea0and08e2e3b82aefad0@mail.gmail.com> <47D0E6A8.2030202@pobox.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803071644m786d8591i84ef6d8b5af2282b@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > I actually have no problem with the idea that self-sacrifice reveals > heroism; it shows the importance to them of whatever they are > pursuing. The implication that heroism *requires* self-sacrifice > implies that there is no other way to show dedication, however. > > After all, the point of heroism is not to reveal virtue, but to > protect that which is worth protecting. > > My own conceptualization of heroism is touched on somewhat in: > > http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/11/superhero-bias.html > http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/01/something-to-pr.html Max may be teaching a 500's course, but I seem to be stuck teaching Story 101. Eliezer makes some good points above, but the conundrum of 'how heroic is superhero heroism' as opposed to 'normal hero heroism' is one that storytellers have been grappling with for some time -- I'd say at least several thousand years. >From Gilgamesh's fear of death to Lucifer's fall from grace to Achilles' heel to Superman's kryptonite, the vulnerability of the superhero may indeed be the oldest story ever told because without it, we don't care about the superhero at all. Why? Lack of empathy, which is at the core of Eliezer's argument, although never specified. We can empathize more easily over the difficulties, therefore imbue the policeman's act with more heroism. Not the superhero's effort. In a post on writing about the Singularity a couple of years ago, I wrote about the hobbling of the augmented hero. http://pj-manney.blogspot.com/2006/09/singularity-or-bust.html Maybe my choice of the word "hobbling" is indicative of how deeply embedded the Achilles reference is in the collective consciousness (if I may go all Jungian on y'all). In the Freudian era of the 20th C., we hobbled them in obvious psychological ways, although Mary Shelley was doing that well before Freud. (Both Frankenstein and the creature are deeply screwed up and in pain and therefore, fascinating and relatable.) Peter Parker, Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne are all in need of therapy, with daddy issues, sufficiency issues, survivor-guilt issues, sexual issues... They've got so many issues, it's amazing they can get out of bed in the morning! It's that effort to don the cape and tights every day in the face of crippling psychological problems that makes them compelling, empathetic, and therefore, heroic. Not saving the world from the Green Hornet. Because even though I agree that the world is very much worth saving, it is the fact that they can save it with one hand tied behind their back that makes their herodom less valued, as Eliezer pointed out, and in need of complications. Back to self-sacrifice, there are mythic stories that don't involve it, per se, but still involve the danger of physical or metaphysical crash. As Terry and Jef hinted, they involve the heroism of self knowledge and enlightenment, although these are still gained by taking social and physical risks. Buddha is a primary myth. Why do I feel Max is mining us for a paper? :) If you are, a little more detail on what you really want would be appreciated. PJ From ABlainey at aol.com Sat Mar 8 00:55:05 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 19:55:05 EST Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: In a message dated 07/03/2008 06:51:55 GMT Standard Time, sparkle_robot at yahoo.com writes: > I have no argument with any of this -- I literally took the > "self-sacrifice" thing to mean "sacrifice of a person's very life" in the initial context of > the question, but you're right in pointing out that it isn't always life > that's at risk. (To me I say, "Duh!") > > If Max was really referring to a hero who literally risks *nothing* > important to him or her, but still manages heroism, then my first thought would be a > kind of Zen-type character who has no "attachments" and therefore does not > feel that any outcome represents a personal loss, even if others might consider > particular outcomes very distressing. But I don't know if many readers > would be able to relate to such a character. > > - Anne > I read it differently, My take on self sacrifice was a little bit more obscure. What of a parent who devotes their time and effort to a disabled child? Surely this is a worthy self sacrifice without giving up their life. Heroic? or just doing their duty. There are many equal examples, do we consider them heroes? I don't think we do, although society does recognise such sacrifice occasionally, but not really in the heroic sense. Would a bomb disposal expert be considered heroic? what if the risk were removed and they were doing it from the comfort of a van, operating a robot? To me there are many factors in heroism which sway the equation. Personal risk, duty, gain, relation to the person/thing being saved, Kudos, probability of success, level of self worth, etc. Other factors sway it as well such as are there any other people who could step up to the plate and do the deed, or would the deed save more lives' than would be risked. I am at a loss to think of an example of being heroic without any risk. Certainly not within my own context of the word 'Hero.' Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 01:02:01 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:02:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803062250n4b193fceic7d656edbbb759fe@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <417227.72430.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <29666bf30803062135j1a86a68aqbf418920773d0bec@mail.gmail.com> <200803070013.51722.kanzure@gmail.com> <29666bf30803062250n4b193fceic7d656edbbb759fe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803071702q5d9d63b6l4e36e93a447b2de6@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:50 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > We call an unempathetic protagonist a supervillian. > > No. Villains can be very empathetic, just terribly misguided and > immoral as a result. Also, protagonists can be very misguided, even > immoral, and still empathetic, too. Empathy doesn't involve white > hats, white horses or anything else white for that matter. It just > means you can imagine being in their shoes and you understand why they > made the choices they made. > > If you can't generate empathy, meaning you can't imagine being that > person, then you've got either a dull villain or a duller hero. > Yawn... For some reason, I was thinking of this song: Jonathan Coulton's "Skullcrusher Mountain" to show a ridiculously cliched (and mythic!) supervillain for whom you can have empathy: http://youtube.com/watch?v=-htGFyvkzDU&feature=related Welcome to my secret lair on Skullcrusher Mountain I hope that you've enjoyed your stay so far I see you've met my assistant Scarface His appearance is quite disturbing But I assure you he's harmless enough He's a sweetheart, calls me master And he has a way of finding pretty things and bringing them to me I'm so into you But I'm way too smart for you Even my henchmen think I'm crazy I'm not surprised that you agree If you could find some way to be A little bit less afraid of me You'd see the voices that control me from inside my head Say I shouldn't kill you yet I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you But I get the feeling that you don't like it What's with all the screaming? You like monkeys, you like ponies Maybe you don't like monsters so much Maybe I used too many monkeys Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? I'm so into you But I'm way too smart for you Even my henchmen think I'm crazy I'm not surprised that you agree If you could find some way to be A little bit less afraid of me You'd see the voices that control me from inside my head Say I shouldn't kill you yet Picture the two of us alone inside my golden submarine While up above the waves my doomsday squad ignites the atmosphere And all the fools who live their foolish lives may find it quite explosive But it won't mean half as much to me if I don't have you here You know it isn't easy living here on Skullcrusher Mountain Maybe you could cut me just a little slack Would it kill you to be civil? I've been patient, I've been gracious And this mountain is covered with wolves Hear them howling, my hungry children Maybe you should stay and have another drink and think about me and you I'm so into you But I'm way too smart for you Even my henchmen think I'm crazy I'm not surprised that you agree If you could find some way to be A little bit less afraid of me You'd see the voices that control me from inside my head Say I shouldn't kill you yet I shouldn't kill you yet I shouldn't kill you yet Coulton specializes in empathizing with his monsters. BTW, I love this Coulton song: "The Future Soon" http://youtube.com/watch?v=G4SGACSLdRY&feature=related The destruction of humanity will occur because some geek got turned down for a date... and listen to the audience go, "Awwwwwwww..." :), PJ From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 01:07:44 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 01:07:44 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 12:55 AM, ABlainey wrote: > Would a bomb disposal expert be considered heroic? what if the risk were > removed and they were doing it from the comfort of a van, operating a robot? > To me there are many factors in heroism which sway the equation. Personal > risk, duty, gain, relation to the person/thing being saved, Kudos, > probability of success, level of self worth, etc. Other factors sway it as > well such as are there any other people who could step up to the plate and > do the deed, or would the deed save more lives' than would be risked. > > I am at a loss to think of an example of being heroic without any risk. > Certainly not within my own context of the word 'Hero.' > This reminds me of the company IT 'hero'. The firefighter who runs around from emergency to emergency, shouting a lot, working through the night, and accepting all the rewards and applause. While Dilbert in his cubicle, does his backups, applies his patches, runs through his checklists, etc. and never has an emergency. And everybody wonders what his job is, as he never appears to be doing anything. Who's the real hero? BillK From ablainey at aol.com Sat Mar 8 01:10:16 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:10:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CA4ED04D24FDF1-788-2934@Webmail-mg08.sim.aol.com> From: ABlainey at aol.com To me there are many factors in heroism which sway the equation. Personal risk, duty, gain, relation to the person/thing being saved, Kudos, probability of success, level of self worth, etc. Other factors sway it as well such as are there any other people who could step up to the plate and do the deed, or would the deed save more lives' than would be risked. I to add. The understanding the hero has of the situation also changes the value of the deed. Alex ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ablainey at aol.com Sat Mar 8 01:28:03 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:28:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <200803070651.22906.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <720057.44645.qm@web56512.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <200803070651.22906.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CA4ED2C9BD72BF-CF4-29@Webmail-mg08.sim.aol.com> On Friday 07 March 2008, Anne Corwin wrote: > ?I know there's a lot of dramatic tension inherent in the "struggle > to resolve who wins in a zero-sum game", but it would be interesting > to see if similarly satisfying levels of dramatic tension could be > achieved in a setting where everyone manages to win in some way. I think the tension would arise from the risk to whoever/whatever the hero is fighting for or protecting. I think for best effect, The zero sum game must escalate in order to increase the risk to these non-players and thus heighten the drama. Otherwise you are reduced to a punch for punch Superman Vs Bad Superman. Situations which usually wimp out with a luck based win for the protagonist. The other solution is that the game is infinite. A god vs Devil scenario where the reader is the person at risk. Which appears to have been a literary masterpiece! Alex ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ablainey at aol.com Sat Mar 8 01:40:27 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:40:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CA4ED48501009A-CF4-B2@Webmail-mg08.sim.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: BillK This reminds me of the company IT 'hero'. The firefighter who runs around from emergency to emergency, shouting a lot, working through the night, and accepting all the rewards and applause. While Dilbert in his cubicle, does his backups, applies his patches, runs through his checklists, etc. and never has an emergency. And everybody wonders what his job is, as he never appears to be doing anything. Who's the real hero? BillK LOL, Thanks Bill. You brought back so many memories. I have been in both situations as many of us have. Personally I think that Dilbert is the far greater unsung hero, and without doubt the more mature. Alex ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ABlainey at aol.com Sat Mar 8 01:52:10 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:52:10 EST Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties Message-ID: In a message dated 07/03/2008 02:49:59 GMT Standard Time, kanzure at gmail.com writes: > On Thursday 06 March 2008, ABlainey at aol.com wrote: > > Exactly, It's a worry (short term). Is the cost of immortality > > loosing our identity and humanity? > > Please don't take that to be my meaning. Stathis' message clarifies it. > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ Don't fear, I didn't. It was just my own concern in response to your reply. No clarification needed. Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 01:55:37 2008 From: giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com (giancarlos) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:55:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com><470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com><009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede><580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com><007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <35b601c880bf$82928b50$37effea9@casac679d9543b> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stefano Vaj" To: "Lee Corbin" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 12:00 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy > while the usual couple of > Italian supporters of Mr. Bush's crusades Are you talking about me? Please can you let us know when and where I supported Mr. Bush? Wait.. oh yes! Maybe I understand: just as you usually say I'm a "Christian" *because* (!) I'm an advocate of human rights, democracy and equality (that you consider the products of the "judeo-christian principle" which corrupted and perverted the old (indo)european "sovrumanist principle"), you're now saying that I'm a Bush supporter perhaps *because* (!) some times ago I found quite worrying - and publicly said it in the italian mailing list - that one of your sovrumanist apprentice elaborated and wrote the following anti-american ravings (my translation): <> (http://www.italiasociale.org/Geopolitica_articoli/avanguardia.htm) Interestingly, he's the same friend of yours who wrote an enthusiastic review of your last book Biopolitica on the same "Italia Sociale, the the national socialist bimonthly" (http://www.italiasociale.org/libri/libri110706-3.html), the same you asked to join the italian mailing list (while ostracizing and marginalizing other long time italian transhumanists who opposed the "sovrumanist drift" of italian transhumanism), the same whose articles you often indicate and recommend in the italian mailing list... Anyway, although I don't like President Bush particularly, I admit that I prefer by far him if compared with Ahmadinejad, although I know that you are a great fan and supporter of the Iranian President (I remember that you verbatim said that Ahmadinejhad is "a figure decidely charismatic: I'm not able to criticize even one of his moves"). Finally -- as I intend to translate that above-mentioned infamous review of your book, published on the above-mentioned national socialist website and written by the above-mentioned sovrumanist and waffen SS admirer, but on the other hand I would prefer not to waste my time if unnecessary -- please can you let us know once and for all if you endorse or instead reject the content of that review? Giancarlo http://www.linkedin.com/in/stile From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Sat Mar 8 02:48:37 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 18:48:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <991569.80813.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> ABlainey at aol.com wrote: I am at a loss to think of an example of being heroic without any risk. Certainly not within my own context of the word 'Hero.' Same here, though I guess I see "risk" as being different from "sacrifice". I definitely don't think it's possible for someone to be "heroic" (given my understanding of what that means) if they aren't at least willing to take risks in some situations. A world without risk would be a boring one indeed (even bearing in mind a plausible world in which "death" is not the primary risk), and in a world where risk exists, it seems to be the default assumption that most people will either: (a) Seek to minimize personal risk (to the point of fear-based inaction even when they know a risky action might lead to tremendous benefit if taken), or: (b) Take risks, but mainly for the "thrill" of doing so. Literary (and real) heroes, on the other hand, will take risks, but they're either smarter or more creative about doing so than average, or they risk things in such a way that their deeper, admirable ethical principles are revealed, making them appealing/inspiring as characters. I would almost wager that the "sacrifice" notion is a red herring here: that is, the hero isn't thinking of him/herself at all (and what they stand to lose) when deciding to act -- rather, s/he is thinking of how to produce the best outcome to the situation at hand. The fact that they personally might "lose something" if the risk doesn't pan out is sort of irrelevant, or at least it seems that way in many formulations of the heroic archetype I've come across. - Anne --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 05:25:36 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:25:36 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com><002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> Jeff> Oh no! Not again! ;-) Sorry for that. I probably wasn't a member of this list when this subject was discussed for the first time. From sentience at pobox.com Sat Mar 8 05:43:15 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:43:15 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com><002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> Message-ID: <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > Jeff> Oh no! Not again! ;-) > > Sorry for that. I probably wasn't a member of this list when this subject > was discussed for the first time. Hell, *I* wasn't here for the first time. Or the second time, or the third time, or the fourth time. I think I might have been here for the sixth through sixteenth times. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From amara at amara.com Sat Mar 8 06:11:40 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 23:11:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Sabine: "A Brief History of Mine" (part 3) Message-ID: Sabine continues to amaze me.. this is one of the most honest and heartfelt descriptions of working in science that I've read on the Internet. And it makes me proud to be her friend. http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2008/03/brief-history-of-mine-iii.html Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 08:54:35 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:54:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> I think after uploading (like after every significant change), I am still me if and only if both the previous me and the future me are willing to accept the future me as a valid continuation of the previous me. G. From estropico at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 09:02:09 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:02:09 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance thereof Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803080102x3f760c01mfd471a0e09690dc@mail.gmail.com> I couldn't help noticing that my suggestion for a compromise on the subject of Stefano Vaj's alleged penchant for nazi iconography has been typically sidestepped. Here's the proposal: [in order to protect Vaj's real identity] > we could post the animated version of the logo on YouTube, removing the > references to Stefano's business, his real surname and the business' url. http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2008-March/041511.html However, given that Vaj won't play ball and give us any answers, this thread is boring indeed, as someone has commented. Before I abandon it, though, I'm going to sum it up - as it looks from my point of view: -Stefano "Vaj" has no problem ignoring netiquette and revealing other people's real name on a public list such as this, as he has done in my case in another thread. Despite that, he steadfastedly refuses to disclose his real name to the list, even as he insists that it's a totally trivial issue. My only guess for this behaviour is that "respected lawyer" Stefano XXXXX would rather avoid being associated with the extreme political writings of "Stefano Vaj". -The Waffen-SS business logo: obviously Vaj subscribes to the saying that an image is worth a thousands words, hence his categorical refusal to allow the list a peek at the logo he has had no problem displaying of his business website for a number of years. Then again, the logo is only the "cherry" on the "cake" that are Vaj's political writings. Now that I've noted the above, I will move on to the politics of "overhumanism" in other threads. Cheers, Fabio From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Mar 8 09:20:11 2008 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 01:20:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] How could you ever support an AGI? In-Reply-To: <002901c87e97$acda7aa0$e4f14d0c@MyComputer> References: <47CD902B.6030708@kevinfreels.com> <332396.36633.qm@web31302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <2d6187670803041331r6c87c30fx3388ae9da5053147@mail.gmail.com> <002901c87e97$acda7aa0$e4f14d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Mar 5, 2008, at 12:04 AM, John K Clark wrote: > John Grigg in response to giovanni santost wrote: > > > You are badly anthropomorphizing the AGI. > > For God's sake, we're back with that crap! Prove to me why > anthropomorphizing is always a bad thing. Come on, I dare > you to try, come on, mess with me! Who would want to mess with an evolved monkey already literally slinging crap and no doubt getting ready to verbally beat his chest? :-) Seriously, it doesn't sound like good entertainment value. > > > > It will most likely not have the same biological > > drives/wiring that you and I have. > > If true then the AGI, that is to say, the American Geological > Institute (or perhaps you mean Artificial Intelligence) will > be even more unpredictable than I thought it was; and that > was pretty God Damn unpredictable. The logic is irrefutable, > the friendly AI idea is brain dead dumb. Thanks for you highly priced and doubtless extremely insightful opinion. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From estropico at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 09:21:38 2008 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:21:38 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > At the same time, I am surprised that, while the usual couple of > Italian supporters of Mr. Bush's crusades... Too easy and not very original... (have you noticed how these days if you want to damage somebody politically this has become the standard tactic?) As I mentioned before in reply to Stefano's surreal rants, please have a look at my blog and site (google translations are bad but not that bad that you can't judge for yourself). www.estropico.com www.estropico.blogspot.com Cheers, Fabio From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 11:45:44 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 12:45:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy In-Reply-To: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803080345t502f2bb1h4ea5abd12f00cad2@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:21 AM, estropico wrote: > > From: "Stefano Vaj" > > At the same time, I am surprised that, while the usual couple of > > Italian supporters of Mr. Bush's crusades... > > Too easy and not very original... (have you noticed how these days if > you want to damage somebody politically this has become the standard > tactic?) > Should I discuss instead the swastika tattooed on your wife's left breast to the tone of "please feel free to provide photographic evidence if you really do not have anything to hide"? I prefer to leave this much more original technique to you and your friend, and/or the new people or pseudonyms you may still be able to summon and to make subscribe to this list for this purpose. OK, from now on, in spite of some useful work you may have done in the past for the spreading of H+ texts in Italy, I do consider you as a stalker and a troll on the same level as your friend here, and I will do my best to restrain myself from any further reply to your postings. One-sided flame wars tend to expose the responsibles to ridicule and to growing impatience from other subscribers, and I shall count on that to do me justice. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 12:28:00 2008 From: giancarlitobrigante at gmail.com (giancarlos) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 13:28:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy References: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803080345t502f2bb1h4ea5abd12f00cad2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <006201c88117$d9a06ea0$37effea9@casac679d9543b> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stefano Vaj > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 12:45 PM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy > > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:21 AM, estropico wrote: > >> From: "Stefano Vaj" >> At the same time, I am surprised that, while the usual couple of >> Italian supporters of Mr. Bush's crusades... > > Too easy and not very original... (have you noticed how these days if > you want to damage somebody politically this has become the standard > tactic?) > > (...) > > OK, from now on, in spite of some useful work you may have done in the > past > for the spreading of H+ texts in Italy, I do consider you as a stalker and > a > troll on the same level as your friend here, Fabio, I think that it's quite evident that Stefano doesn't want (isn't able) to reply to the factual claims and comments we reported, and prefers to launch personal attacks (stalker, troll, psychopath, etc) in order to sidetrack the issue. >From wikipedia, again: "a personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when examining another person's claims or comments. It is considered a personal attack when a person starts referencing a supposed flaw or weakness in an individual's personality, beliefs, lifestyle, convictions or principles, and use it as a debate tactic or as a means of avoiding discussion of the relevance or truthfulness the person's statement. It works on the reasoning that, by discrediting the source of a logical argument, namely the person making it, the argument itself can be weakened. (...) On the other hand, illuminating real character flaws and inconsistencies in the position of an opponent are a vital part of the public political process and of the adversarial judicial process. Use of a personal attack in a logical argument constitutes a formal fallacy called ad hominem, a term that comes from a Latin phrase meaning "toward the man" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_attacks). At this point, think it's appropriate to stop the discussion: those who weren't and aren't interested with good reason could get impatient and bored, while those who showed interested have now enough elements to form their own personal opinion. Giancarlo http://www.linkedin.com/in/stile From scerir at libero.it Sat Mar 8 14:25:47 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 15:25:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy References: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803080345t502f2bb1h4ea5abd12f00cad2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009201c88128$4f81f110$29bb1f97@archimede> Santa pazienza! Those tattoed swastikas, and the other nazifascist rigmaroles, have little to do with the subject line, the 'bon ton', and the Extropian Principles. If this is the Italian way to the ?bermensch, I would rather prefer the Totalmensch of the Italian Renaissance. From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 14:56:26 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 15:56:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy In-Reply-To: <009201c88128$4f81f110$29bb1f97@archimede> References: <4eaaa0d90803080121q639dae0bs6ceb35c51a7cb623@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803080345t502f2bb1h4ea5abd12f00cad2@mail.gmail.com> <009201c88128$4f81f110$29bb1f97@archimede> Message-ID: <580930c20803080656n12f3869at94267d01a3d2a2c0@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM, scerir wrote: > Santa pazienza! > Those tattoed swastikas, and the other > nazifascist rigmaroles, have little > to do with the subject line, the 'bon ton', > and the Extropian Principles. > If this is the Italian way to the ?bermensch, > I would rather prefer the Totalmensch of the > Italian Renaissance. > I fully agree. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 8 15:42:01 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 07:42:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071536g2a6309a3k3e104df28229a2e1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <013901c88133$11abb500$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stefano writes (sorry for previous misspellings) > > But to *emulate* you means that something really is you, just as one > > operating system may emulate another. I didn't make this distinction > > above when I first wrote, due to shortage of space. A successful > > upload emulates you perfectly, has your thoughts and feelings (or, > > perhaps the ones you may have tomorrow), and your genuine > > internal experiences. > > Sure. But I wonder whether after all the simulation in the first sense > could ever be "perfect", It need not be perfect, just enough to be me. Consider the set of all transformations that might be applied to me. "Slapping" (a common desire on this list), "enriching", "depriving of sleep", "uploading", "teleporting", and so on and on. All of those things may change me a little---but that's okay, I'm still me. Only if I'm drafted into an army for five years, or you remove enough of my brain, or do anything else sufficiently drastic, do I lose my identity and become someone else. Henrique wrote > But with an emulation, the uploading proccess is some kind of "make a copy > and destroy (probably) the original". Right. > Then the uploaded me would not be me. Well, quite a few people differ, and as you've gathered, most of us, even me, are too weary to debate it a whole lot. Sorry. You might like my story http://www.leecorbin.com/PitAndDuplicate.html and two essays I have about it. (See below.) But they probably won't help convince you that a physically identical copy differs in no way whatsoever from the original. People's views on these matters always seem pretty entrenched. First is Continuity of Identity: The Last Refuge of the Soul http://www.leecorbin.com/LastRefuge.html The second is titled, quite confidently "Duplicates are Self: A proof" http://www.leecorbin.com/dupproof.html Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 15:49:07 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 08:49:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200803071735.56155.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803061836.49412.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803071132i4862cca1h93b3e6bdba8d484f@mail.gmail.com> <200803071735.56155.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803080749k7482fb04ja5e7281994bf07fd@mail.gmail.com> On 3/7/08, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 07 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > > Hi Bryan, I enjoyed the exchange of ideas. I'd be curious to know > > where you will be standing on these issues in ten or twenty years, > > considering you are currently a very young man. > > And am I to call you very old? >>> I'm not there yet! lol I meant no disrespect in calling you a very young man. : ) My point was that the views of people do tend to change during the time they go from youth to early middle age. But perhaps yours will not. > > > > Instead, they simply don't do the controversial research or else move > > to a nation where it is allowed/encouraged. And that nation then > > reaps the benefits. > > The only reason nations reap benefits is because of the locality of the > person, but in our age of travel and communication, locality is not as > an important factor as before, but still important, yeah. >>> And nations such as Singapore have greatly benefited from politically driven "brain drains." > > > > And even though the research and development would continue in > > > > other nations, the U.S. would then be at a serious disadvantage > > > > to be a leader in the biotech field and reap the financial > > > > harvest. And remember that it's just plain "un-American" to not > > > > make tons of money and dominate technological progress! lol > > > > > > Heh, well, with self-replication there might be a collapse of the > > > financial institutions, but not if they play their cards right. So > > > that's something that somebody might want to put some thought into. > > > > In the name of national security (and the unspoken desire of > > corporations to keep their stranglehold on the economy) we will see > > the possibility of nanotech "anything boxes" most likely squelched > You have nanotech (bacteria) all around you. And it's not squelched. >>> We humans need tools to research and utilize nanotech. I see governments using a "war on drugs" approach if necessary to halt "home nanotech." But then again, the war on drugs has in many ways been a failure. > > > > > you continue: > > > > > No matter how much they proclaim to be against a possibility > > > > > does not determine that bottom line of feasability. Yes, they > > > > > can protest, yes, they can try to stone us, they can try to > > > > > burn us alive, but you see, we can diffuse the information over > > > > > the internet, and good luck warring against the internet. It > > > > > will route around the damage. > > > > > > > > But warring against research labs and those who fund them in > > > > another matter, entirely. It generally takes serious money and > > > > disciplined scientific teams to tease out Mother Nature's > > > > secrets. > > > > > > Nah, it just takes discipline. That's the whole discipline of > > > science. It does not take money, but rather the raw resources. The > > > guys that build particle accelerators and energy stations? They had > > > the discipline to make it happen even when there wasn't necessarily > > > a "plutonium economy" or "electricity economy" when they started > > > off. > > > > The guys who built the particle accelerators and energy stations got > > big hunks of money from government and corporate sponsors. They had > > the discipline to gather the grant money that got things > > accomplished. > > Ability to gather money does not indicate whether or not they can do it. >>> It sure does gets them off to a good start! lol But you are right in that money gathering talent does not guarantee success in research. > > > > of global competitiveness. And by the time we try to really turn > > > > things around we may have lost some critical advantages that > > > > might never be fully regained. > > > > > > Maybe. Can you own an advantage, even in natural-evolutionary > > > terms? > > > > What the U.S. and Western world might have are certain given > > educational and social foundations that make technological catch up > > much easier on us as compared to China or Russia. > > What? My question was whether you can 'own' an advantage in the game > theoretic sense of natural evolution. Ownership and property has > recently been discussed more thoroughly on the list, so naturally I see > this as a relevant extension to those thoughts. > >>> If you mean owning an advantage as a current society in the sense that a societal competitor could not replicate what you are doing to surge forward due to biological/evolutionary constraints, then no. Human/AGI accelerated evolution may be a whole other story... > > > What knowledge and power? What does the military have that cannot > > > be already duplicated? Airplanes? Easily duplicated (though not > > > necessarily the money to make many tests. This is of course a > > > matter of resources, not money.) Nuclear weapons? Non-military > > > persons came up with nukes. Navy machinery? Easy enough. > > > > Knowledge IS power. Academic and corporate research labs are spread > > across the U.S. and the backbone of much military and economic r & d. No, people are the backbone, and what one human can think, so can > another. >>> And where does that knowledge/power come from? People, of course! "What one human can think, so can another," tends toward being very simplistic. How well the brightest folks in each society are educated, supported and organized to maximize their talents toward successful innovation is a key factor that differentiates various nations/societies and will limit or enhance their efforts. > > Yes, non-military people came up with much of this. lol By the way, > > resources and money go hand in hand. : ) > > Resources and money do not go hand-in-hand. >> They often do, but not always. Some nations are very resource poor but are technologically and industrially advanced and so they buy resources from high resource nations that are technologically backward. But often resources and money DO go hand-in-hand. The United States is among a number of resource rich nations that have been monetarily/economically blessed in this category. And this definitely is a *great* advantage in terms of global competition and national security. > > A "standard" and non-high performance jet fighter, tank, missle > > cruiser, civilian product for sale, etc. may be relatively easy to > > create, but designing and manufacturing a very advanced (superior to > > potential enemies/competitors) version is a great challenge. Rival > > I don't see how this is true. I have been studying how to make my own > copy of the X-43A, the NASA Hyper-X hypersonic Mach 10 aircraft. As far > as I can tell, the hardest part is just reading the documentation on > the CFD simulators (heh), but then there's finding an artist to model > the ship properly, then assembling the right metals and a cooling > system, getting an oxyacetalone arc welder, doing the CNC metalworking, > and most importantly the preliminary design work in coming up with the > right PDEs and mission design parameters. The only thing *hard* is > evolutionary progression of novelty. Anything else is not 'hard'. >>> LOL!!! Bryan, I have to say you are a cool guy and fun to have a discussion with. The paragraph above just floored me. Is your real name Tom Swift, Reed Richards, Tony Stark or Howard Hughes? : ) You certainly have an "October Sky" or "The Astronaut Farmer" quality in the way you view your personal possibilities. And for all I know you may go on to be the next Burt Rutan. I truly hope so and are rooting for you to succeed. > > nations will have a very challenging time matching our most advanced > > tech (and as they try to catch up we would be moving forward to stay > > ahead) unless the complete designs and manufacturing methods are > > Open source. > > > stolen. Espionage/stolen military and industrial secrets are a huge > > problem for the U.S. and the rest of the Western world. > > Maybe they would do better to be able to exist in such a way that they > do not entirely rely on such outdated security models? Secrets?? >>> I would like to think that one day humanity could overcome the overwhelming desire for intellectual property rights and in a spirit of global cooperation still make technological and economic progress. Hold on..., are you an operative for the TSA??? ; ) > > > We are in a race to develop whatever the next generation of > > > > technological innovations are that we must have to stay not just > > > > competitive, but ahead of the rest of the world. And yes, we do > > > > have > > > > > > This is FUD. > > > > This is THE REAL WORLD. lol > > You can stay competitive even with shared knowledge, see OSS. >>> It definitely has it's downsides at the current time but it does give hope for what a nanotech era may look like. > > If the U.S. does not protect it's technology base by better security, > > improving public education, etc., you will see in your lifetime our > > steep decline. It will be a very sad thing. > > Decline in what? >>> Economic power, environmental quality, standard of living, global influence, military power, etc... > > > > Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can cause > > > > > > It is also more fud. > > > > It can be at times. But do you really think other powerful nations > > always have our best interests at heart? lol Life is not just > > cooperation but also competition. Nature teaches us that. And it > > still holds true for humanity. > > What are you talking about? I didn't even mention 'nations' having best > interests at heart etc. Specifically, you are promoting the concept of > nationalism even when we know that we can make things and build > solutions to our human problems, you are just pointing to archaic > methods of cooperation which can be surpassed. >>> You kept on mentioning FUD. "Fear, uncertainty, doubt." When/if nanotech gets to the point where common citizens can make/or are close to making their own personal "anything boxes," we will see governments reflexively clamp down so hard your head will spin. They will take the FUD meme and whip it into overdrive as they struggle to maintain control. The current "war on drugs" and "war on terror" will seem extremely mild by comparison. I admit it would be so wonderful (right out of a really good SF story turned real) to have our own personal nanotech anything boxes and from the raw materials in our backyard to build a spacecraft to get into orbit so we could join with others of likemind and construct a L5 colony or a starship to do deep space exploration (or whatever else our hearts desired!). I have very fond memories from the Extro 5 Conference of discussing this very dream with a small group of Extropians as we were driving around the area. John : ) > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 8 15:55:08 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 07:55:08 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Ideological Differences in Transhumanist Italy References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> BillK wrote > > I can't be the only one who sees potential value in our Italian friends > > holding up a mirror for us in the west, but whose reflection perhaps > > has much potential for helping us even understand ourselves. > I doubt if our USA friends would find much value in the intricate > postmodern European political factions. Interesting? Possibly, like > poking a stick into an anthill and watching all the frantic scurrying > around. Stefano writes > In fact, my main concern as far as "positioning" is concerned is to > keep myself as far from teocons as possible :-); but if, say, > Nietzsche or Marinetti or Huxley or Heinlein should be considered as > being right-wing, well, so be it, I have no intention whatsoever to > renounce to what of interest I may find in their writings out of > political correctness or fear of ideological terrorism. That last is the important part, thanks. > I think that it would be best to recognise that old labels may end up > being of limited use in an era of revolutionary change, to go back to > Korzybski's idea that the map is not the territory, and concentrate > instead on ideas and new syntheses thereof. All my life whenever people have said that, I had to conclude that at least for here in America, they were simply refusing to face reality. There really is a left/right spectrum, though many people (myself included) find we have exceptional positions on some issues. But you could be entirely correct. Perhaps it stands to reason that the 200 year old dichotomy is beginning to fail. Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 8 16:22:02 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 10:22:02 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Teocon In-Reply-To: <015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> <015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308101730.024264f8@satx.rr.com> This Italian/European political term, unfamiliar in English, has been used several times. Here's a google translation from http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teocon: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 8 16:18:02 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 08:18:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com><002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome><47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Giulio writes >I think after uploading (like after every significant change), I am > still me if and only if both the previous me and the future me are > willing to accept the future me as a valid continuation of the > previous me. So marvelously concise and sensible! Of course, there are many who will never believe that anything outside their own skin can be the same person that they are, and for them, your example isn't of any use. Too bad. Because in one sentence you've summarized exactly how personal identity will be handled in the future. Thanks, Lee From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 8 16:34:14 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:34:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "Thoughts Without a Thinker" re: Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <8CA4F516114393F-4F0-125B@webmail-nf10.sim.aol.com> Marvin Minsky sometime ago wrote a book, "Thoughts Without a Thinker." It sounds similar to "Heroism without self-sacrifice." Thoughts of heroism are thoughts embedded in memory with no apparent owner, thinker or an uncaused cause. Even an AGI is caused. Some scientific discoveries happen by random chance. Who owns/controls chance? Thoughts of heroism entails this curiosity to know the unknown without fear of failure or hope for success. Just thoughts, Terry {Zen Practitioner} From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 16:18:37 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 17:18:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803080818n27b57e68hde958831b582fdac@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Max More wrote: > Department of Strategic Philosophy > Professor Max More > Course 510: Extropic Myth Analysis > > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. I have not read the rest of the thread, but have reflected a little on the assigned "demonstration", and the following is what I could come up with: - Essentially and originally a hero is simply an individual denoted by a semi-divine status: in the Ancient Greece, an individual typically endowed by his genetic (!) peculiarity, as the hybrid offspring of a god and a human being, allowing and making him behave in a "heroic", i.e., extraordinary, way (reversing the myth, heroics of a given individual may make for a semi-divine status attributed to, and recognised in, him by the relevant community). Self-sacrifice has thus not anything necessarily to do with the idea of "heroic", and more with the idea of "tragic", even though the two ideas are intertwined (see below). - Undeniably, however, in most cases the hero myth finishes with the end of at least the natural life of the individual concerned (death, ascension to heaven, departure towards the land beyond the sea, whatever). OTOH, traditionally, this had hardly the connotation of "acceptance of suffering", "self-denial", "humble renunciation to the world and its appeals" that it took in monotheistic cultures. "Sacrifice" was etymologically intended as a triumphal and final achievement "making something sacred" (see "sacrum facere" in Latin). - Even in the everyday concept of hero, heroics have more to do with the idea of "putting oneself fully into play", "being the living incarnation of a cause", or "consciously accepting the related risks", than with personal self-sacrifice, which is at most a possible, and certainly not deliberately and masochistically sought, outcome of such a position. Thus again, nothing prevents a (lucky) hero from escaping all forms of "sacrifice", and living instead a rather happy and fulfilling life, even though only as a byproduct of his other goals. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 17:11:05 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:11:05 -0600 Subject: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803080749k7482fb04ja5e7281994bf07fd@mail.gmail.com> References: <939952.8409.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803071735.56155.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803080749k7482fb04ja5e7281994bf07fd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803081111.05175.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 08 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > On 3/7/08, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > On Friday 07 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > > > In the name of national security (and the unspoken desire of > > > corporations to keep their stranglehold on the economy) we will > > > see the possibility of nanotech "anything boxes" most likely > > > squelched > > > > You have nanotech (bacteria) all around you. And it's not > > squelched. > > We humans need tools to research and utilize nanotech. I see > governments using a "war on drugs" approach if necessary to halt > "home nanotech." But then again, the war on drugs has in many ways > been a failure. War on nanotech -> kill all your cells? > > > If the U.S. does not protect it's technology base by better > > > security, improving public education, etc., you will see in your > > > lifetime our steep decline. It will be a very sad thing. > > > > Decline in what? > > Economic power, environmental quality, standard of living, global > influence, military power, etc... In the case of nanotech, economic power will be meaningless: only the ability to self-replicate will be power. Environmental quality we will have to deal with, maybe by figuring out how to make our own new environments or work synergistically with the ones we already have, standard of living is a definition based off of rGDP so that's just economics, and a decline in military power doesn't sound too bad to me, as long as we do in fact have the nanotech. > > > > > Nationalism is a two-edged sword. On the one side it can > > > > > cause > > > > > > > > It is also more fud. > > > > > > It can be at times. But do you really think other powerful > > > nations always have our best interests at heart? lol Life is not > > > just cooperation but also competition. Nature teaches us that. > > > And it still holds true for humanity. > > > > What are you talking about? I didn't even mention 'nations' having > > best interests at heart etc. Specifically, you are promoting the > > concept of nationalism even when we know that we can make things > > and build solutions to our human problems, you are just pointing to > > archaic methods of cooperation which can be surpassed. > > You kept on mentioning FUD. "Fear, uncertainty, doubt." When/if > nanotech gets to the point where common citizens can make/or are > close to making their own personal "anything boxes," we will see > governments reflexively clamp down so hard your head will spin. They > will take the FUD meme and whip it into overdrive as they struggle to > maintain control. The current "war on drugs" and "war on terror" > will seem extremely mild by comparison. "The more you tighten your grip, the more we slip through your fingers." - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 8 17:07:47 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:07:47 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice References: <8CA4ED48501009A-CF4-B2@Webmail-mg08.sim.aol.com> Message-ID: <01d401c8813f$8fea9f60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Request for clarification, please. Perhaps this has been answered, but I don't recall precisely. What is "self-sacrifice", exactly, as meant in this thread? I thought that it was the notion of giving up one's life for a greater cause, and doing so knowingly and deliberately. I can imagine giving up one's children (as Abraham was about to do), or one's limbs (as even animals will sometimes do, e.g. chewing a leg off to escape a trap), and that while these are sacrifices, they're not "self-sacrifices". Otherwise, the giving up of anything that one holds to be very valuable (e.g. money for political campaigns) runs the risk of being deemed self-sacrifice. Anyone have a problem with this so far? Thanks a lot! * * * Now, men in war who throw themselves on a grenade to save their fellows can well be considered heros, but to be sure, this does include self-sacrifice. On the other hand, "Heroism without self-sacrifice" seemed to me, and still appear to me, to be just that. So what is heroism? Sorry if the following definition repeats a lot of what has been said A hero is an individual of elevated moral stature and superior ability who pursues his goals indefatigably in the face of powerful antagonist(s). Because of his unbreached devotion to the good, no matter the opposition, a hero attains spiritual grandeur, even in he fails to achieve practical victory. Notice then the four components of heroism: moral greatness, ability or prowess, action in the face of opposition, and triumph in at least a spiritual, if not a physical, form. Of these, the hero's moral stature is unquestionably the most fundamental. An uncompromising commitment to morality is the foundation of heroism. Although the point can be stated simply--the hero is a "good guy"--its reasons are philosophical and apply to all instances of the concept. [ -Mike Mentzer ] This is taken from an otherwise dubious web page at http://www.mikementzer.com/heroism.html, where, despite the sole usage of "him, his" above, the author is a great Ayn Rand fan, and uses her as one of his chief examples. I completely agree with the four characteristics that Mike lists as components: moral greatness ability or prowess action in the face of opposition and triumph in at least a spiritual, if not a physical, form. Even the last is okay, you see, even if the person dies (unintentionally), because a fallen fire-fighter can well be considered to be heroic, if his or her efforts involved the other three. Let's please not stretch the meanings of words to a clearly delineated class such as this. It's an abuse of language, for example, to describe a father as heroic who raised eight children all by himself after his wife's death. Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 17:17:06 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:17:06 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "Thoughts Without a Thinker" re: Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <8CA4F516114393F-4F0-125B@webmail-nf10.sim.aol.com> References: <8CA4F516114393F-4F0-125B@webmail-nf10.sim.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803081117.06954.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 08 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Thoughts of heroism entails this curiosity to know the unknown > without fear of failure or hope for success. As much as I think your ideas are close to the mark, I don't think this would work out. Suppose we had brain interfacing technology and had a massive supercomputer the size of Jupiter decyphering the brain state of our hero, and found that he was, in fact, hoping for a brief 3 seconds at one point in his so-called 'heroic' journey. Does that then mean that he is no longer a hero, for that briefest of thought? I would hope the answer is no. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 8 17:24:38 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:24:38 -0800 Subject: [ExI] war on nanotech and national security: RE: The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists In-Reply-To: <200803081111.05175.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803081751.m28HpLv9007100@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Note new subject line when the topic has (thank you very much) wandered off of the manifesto of Italian Transhumanists (oy vey). The Italian Transhumanist manifesto thread is killed for the time being. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Bryan Bishop > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 9:11 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] The Manifesto of Italian Transhumanists > > On Saturday 08 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > > On 3/7/08, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > > On Friday 07 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > > > > In the name of national security (and the unspoken desire of > > > > corporations to keep their stranglehold on the economy) we will > > > > see the possibility of nanotech "anything boxes" most likely > > > > squelched > > > > > > You have nanotech (bacteria) all around you. And it's not > squelched. > > > > We humans need tools to research and utilize nanotech. I see > > governments using a "war on drugs" approach if necessary to > halt "home > > nanotech." But then again, the war on drugs has in many > ways been a > > failure. > > War on nanotech -> kill all your cells? ... > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 8 18:01:55 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 12:01:55 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <01d401c8813f$8fea9f60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA4ED48501009A-CF4-B2@Webmail-mg08.sim.aol.com> <01d401c8813f$8fea9f60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308115902.02410088@satx.rr.com> At 09:07 AM 3/8/2008 -0800, Lee wrote: >It's an abuse of language, for example, to describe a father as >heroic who raised eight children all by himself after his wife's death. I vehemently disagree. It's a completely justifiable and understandable extension of usage from the mythic or legendary realm to the actual world of humanity. Damien Broderick From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 18:30:38 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 12:30:38 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308115902.02410088@satx.rr.com> References: <01d401c8813f$8fea9f60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080308115902.02410088@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803081230.38437.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 08 March 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > >It's an abuse of language, for example, to describe a father as > >heroic who raised eight children all by himself after his wife's > > death. > > I vehemently disagree. It's a completely justifiable and > understandable extension of usage from the mythic or legendary realm > to the actual world of humanity. Hm. Might it be that, as the number of instances (of fathers who raise eight children on their own) increases, it becomes increasingly less heroic? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 18:29:12 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:29:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] injure thread: RE: Personal "backgrounds" and alleged relevance In-Reply-To: <200803080016.m280GEvm020866@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803071354g2c5fbe33o28dca1957585ce70@mail.gmail.com> <200803080016.m280GEvm020866@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803081029r4d224855w9aa2342e9ac05b02@mail.gmail.com> Spike wrote: > Do not feel the need to > explain it to me however. On the contrary, feel free to let this thread > perish at this point, for it has made me squirmy from the start, and is > getting worse with each post I see. > > Each poster is judged only on the posts that person puts here. > Accusations > regarding anyone's political leanings outside this list are not welcome > nor > helpful. > >>> I'm personally confused as to Stefano's real personal history in relation to Fascism, and yet I still admit to enjoying his posts and personality (being a European Legal Eagle on our side sure does not hurt, either...). But then some Fascists can be very charismatic! lol ; ) I wish Eugen Leitl, Greg Burch or Harvey Newstrom would fully investigate the matter (I realize this would take much time and effort) and then report to the list. This is just my .02 cents worth regarding the matter. Does anyone remember Den Otter? hmmm Sincerely, John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 18:58:20 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 12:58:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <580930c20803080818n27b57e68hde958831b582fdac@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <580930c20803080818n27b57e68hde958831b582fdac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803081258.20381.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 08 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > - Essentially and originally a hero is simply an individual denoted > by a semi-divine status: in the Ancient Greece, an individual > typically endowed by his genetic (!) peculiarity, as the hybrid > offspring of a god and a human being, allowing and making him behave > in a "heroic", i.e., extraordinary, way (reversing the myth, heroics > of a given individual may make for a semi-divine status attributed > to, and recognised in, him by the relevant community). Self-sacrifice Then we are led to think that a hero is one who has achieved divinity? > has thus not anything necessarily to do with the idea of "heroic", > and more with the idea of "tragic", even though the two ideas are > intertwined (see below). I would like to agree, but I can't. Even godhood comes with tragedy. > The supreme tragedy of life, I have always thought, is that it must > end in death. Even for those who die too late, death must one day > come. Which I see you understand: > - Undeniably, however, in most cases the hero myth finishes with the > end of at least the natural life of the individual concerned (death, Indeed. > ascension to heaven, departure towards the land beyond the sea, > whatever). OTOH, traditionally, this had hardly the connotation of > "acceptance of suffering", "self-denial", "humble renunciation to the > world and its appeals" that it took in monotheistic cultures. Yes, while this is far from acceptance-of-self-injury, it is still self-injury, no? You still injure yourself by continuing to live, yes? You continue to face the possibility of evolutionary failure, you have that taste of the infinite. But this 'injury' is only natural, and so we know that it is not, in fact, injury, but rather the way of life ... but we also know that we can change this so-called 'way', that we can recreate it to our liking. I do not mean to say that living-is-injury, but that life is tragic because you have death, and as long as you run from death you are still injurying yourself for death will always come. Ultimately is it you who willed yourself into existence? No. Therefore, perhaps we can argue that it is fate that is injurying you. But do we not, to some extent, determine our own fate? I hope somebody else can see the problem space that I am describing here (one that Zindell seems to understand, per the quote I above). > - Even in the everyday concept of hero, heroics have more to do with > the idea of "putting oneself fully into play", "being the living > incarnation of a cause", or "consciously accepting the related > risks", than with personal self-sacrifice, which is at most a > possible, and certainly not deliberately and masochistically sought, > outcome of such a position. If we are to put ourselves into the realm of play, then why not do it to the best of our ability? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 19:50:25 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 12:50:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> Lee Corbin wrote: Of course, there are many who will never believe that anything outside their own skin can be the same person that they are, and for them, your example isn't of any use. Too bad. Because in one sentence you've summarized exactly how personal identity will be handled in the future. >>> Continuity! Continuity! Continuity! lol I suffer almost post-traumatic syndrome-type memories regarding this thread topic and the other thread subject of gun control. ; ) I always liked the "self-circuit" idea of cryonics giant, Robert Ettinger. I think a good story for exploring the idea of uploading and identity is the one of two scientists who vehemently debate whether a perfectly identical copy of you is TRULY and completely *you*. The two scientists build a matter duplication device and the researcher who believes a perfect copy is absolutely indistinguishable from himself in all ways goes ahead and makes a copy of...., himself! The scientist who had argued that a perfect copy was not to be confused with the original very calmly takes a 44 magnum handgun from a desk drawer, points it at the head of the original scientist (not the perfect in all respects copy of him), and says, "now just how certain are you that your life is utterly indistinguishable from your perfect copy?" LOL There was an Outer Limits episode where a race of very technologically advanced and yet pacifistic (roughly human-sized) Saurians came to the aid of a very polluted and over-populated Earth that is barely surviving. The aliens hold out the promise of new worlds to explore and colonize due to the amazing "teleportation" machines that they are willing to share with us. But their alien mentality is brought out when a female human scientist is "teleported" to one of their worlds but the original woman is left alive. It turns out their "teleportation devices" are simply a very sophisticated duplication technology! They take it for granted that the original traveler at point A is to be killed/vaporized (according to their laws) as soon as the copy is successfully created at point B. The idea of having multiple copies of the same being running around is seen as highly unethical by the aliens and so they demand the death of the women, or they will withdraw their support from humanity. The human concept of a "self-circuit" is totally irrelevant to the reptilian Saurians, who despite being pacificists, still appear to be very cold and callous by human standards. The human leader must make a very hard decision... The plot was in spirit quite similar to the classic Tom Godwin science fiction short story, "The Cold Equations." Stories can sometimes be good food for thought. John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Mar 8 19:48:56 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:48:56 -0600 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080308194916.DGZJ11056.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 02:04 AM 3/6/2008, Amara wrote: >The nine months I spent last year writing government grant proposals >wasn't for nothing, this morning I learned that my last NASA proposal >will be funded (a small project: 4 months per year for two years). This >is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. GREAT! Congratulations Amara! - You GO! Natasha Natasha Vita-More, BFA, MS, MPhil University Lecturer PhD Candidate, Planetary Collegium - University of Plymouth - Faculty of Technology School of Computing, Communications and Electronics Centre for Advanced Inquiry in the Interactive Arts 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 possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 20:30:21 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 13:30:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" In-Reply-To: References: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <2d6187670803081230m3ecd51ccnf409a47bdb7cc8f2@mail.gmail.com> Gary Miller wrote: Bullies bully because they have been trained in aggression at a young age and repeat the behavior without even understanding why. >>> Some intelligent people repeat their bullying behavior *fully understanding why* and simply view it as beneficial to them in getting what they want, to hell with anyone else (as long as they think they can get away with it...). There are many very successful, educated and wealthy individuals throughout the world who unfortunately fit into this rotten category. you continue: I think assertiveness training needs to be a part of every child's schooling. It teaches the difference between being assertive and aggressive and teaches how not to be a victim or a bully. >>> I think this is a great idea. you continue: It give me hope for the future that groups like the Boy Scouts are now offering merit badges for learning about bullying. Scouts are encouraged to speak out for and protect others they see being bullied. >>> I didn't know they had a bullying merit badge! Good for them! I used to be a Boy Scout and have some fond memories. This bullying merit badge combined with "martial arts," "law," "first aid," "crime prevention" and "shotgun shooting," should help young men be ready to deal with the bullies of the world. Oh, but wait... I did some googling and discovered that there has never been a martial arts merit badge! I completely agree with the author of the following link. http://www.semperfitkd.com/boyscouts.asp I hope in time the Boy Scout leadership will change their mind regarding having a martial arts merit badge. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brent.allsop at comcast.net Sat Mar 8 20:50:19 2008 From: brent.allsop at comcast.net (Brent Allsop) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:50:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47D2FC0B.1050405@comcast.net> John, These are great stories that illustrate the problem, but if you ask me it's dumb to worry about any of this if this so far most popular theory of consciousness turns out to be true: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/23/7 Within this theory, there is a description of what uploading will be like in this extremely short story entitled 1229 years after Titanic available here: http://home.comcast.net/~brent.allsop/ If anyone thinks this isn't possible as described, of if they think uploading like this doesn't completely eliminate all of these problems, I'd sure love to capture such a point of view (POV) in either the canonized topic on the Hard Problem, or in the feedback topic about the story. Now we can finally stop arguing about this now resolved issue over and over again right? Brent Allsop John Grigg wrote: > Lee Corbin wrote: > Of course, there are many who will never believe that anything > outside their own skin can be the same person that they are, > and for them, your example isn't of any use. Too bad. Because > in one sentence you've summarized exactly how personal identity > will be handled in the future. > >>> > > Continuity! Continuity! Continuity! lol I suffer almost > post-traumatic syndrome-type memories regarding this thread topic and > the other thread subject of gun control. ; ) > > I always liked the "self-circuit" idea of cryonics giant, Robert > Ettinger. I think a good story for exploring the idea of uploading and > identity is the one of two scientists who vehemently debate whether a > perfectly identical copy of you is TRULY and completely *you*. The > two scientists build a matter duplication device and the researcher > who believes a perfect copy is absolutely indistinguishable from > himself in all ways goes ahead and makes a copy of...., himself! The > scientist who had argued that a perfect copy was not to be confused > with the original very calmly takes a 44 magnum handgun from a desk > drawer, points it at the head of the original scientist (not the > perfect in all respects copy of him), and says, "now just how certain > are you that your life is utterly indistinguishable from your perfect > copy?" LOL > > There was an Outer Limits episode where a race of very technologically > advanced and yet pacifistic (roughly human-sized) Saurians came to the > aid of a very polluted and over-populated Earth that is barely > surviving. The aliens hold out the promise of new worlds to explore > and colonize due to the amazing "teleportation" machines that they are > willing to share with us. > > But their alien mentality is brought out when a female human scientist > is "teleported" to one of their worlds but the original woman is left > alive. It turns out their "teleportation devices" are simply a very > sophisticated duplication technology! They take it for granted that > the original traveler at point A is to be killed/vaporized (according > to their laws) as soon as the copy is successfully created at point > B. The idea of having multiple copies of the same being running > around is seen as highly unethical by the aliens and so they demand > the death of the women, or they will withdraw their support from > humanity. The human concept of a "self-circuit" is totally irrelevant > to the reptilian Saurians, who despite being pacificists, still appear > to be very cold and callous by human standards. The human leader must > make a very hard decision... The plot was in spirit quite similar to > the classic Tom Godwin science fiction short story, "The Cold > Equations." > > Stories can sometimes be good food for thought. > > John : ) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Mar 8 20:54:31 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:54:31 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Vita-More: Transhumanism on the Rise Message-ID: <20080308205435.BCFB13220.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> http://memebox.com/futureblogger From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Mar 8 20:44:02 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 12:44:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" References: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <2d6187670803081230m3ecd51ccnf409a47bdb7cc8f2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004101c8815d$2a5ba590$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: John Grigg Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 12:30 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" > I hope in time the Boy Scout leadership will change their mind regarding > having a martial arts merit badge. I hope in time the Boy Scout and Cub Scout leadership will change their discrimination policies towards atheists and gays. Olga From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 17:55:34 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 18:55:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Teocon In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308101730.024264f8@satx.rr.com> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> <015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080308101730.024264f8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803080955ldc2b7f0t6ac822125c4ccbca@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > This Italian/European political term, unfamiliar in English, has been > used several times. Here's a google translation from > http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teocon: > > neologism derived from the term conservatism with the prefix > "theoretical", coined in the Anglo-Saxon world and in particular the > USA. Nevertheless it is now more widely available in Europe, often > with a different meaning than the original. [[I wonder if it's really > "theological-conservative"? --DB]] > > Mmhhh, I think the reference here is to "theocratic-conservative", theos meaning "god", nothing to do with "theory" (ancient Greek for "view" as in "worldview"). In fact, the alliance between theocons and neocons has been found paradoxical by a few commentators, the former term referring in principle to those who are close to Evangelic or Catholic religious fundamentalism, the latter to those, especially in the US, who are closer to Machiavelian, Hobbesian, "raison d'?tat", "amoral", "post-ideological" politics, if not to mere political coverage of vested interests, where old-style conservative values, let alone religion, may have become more of a rhetoric tool than a shared, good-faith worldview. (After a fashion, I imagnine that a few theocons may consider it as a necessary "pact with the devil") In fact, it can probably be argued that neocons, per se, should in principle be agnostic or even slightly favourable towards technology, at least unless issues of internal or international hegemonic control of the same is involved, and that neo-luddite spins and accents amongst conservatives are mostly the effect of theocon influence; more or less as it happens for Rousseaian neo-primitivism and anti-tech environmentalism amongst left-wingers. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 20:49:21 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 21:49:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <200803081258.20381.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <20080307025445.QHTQ13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <580930c20803080818n27b57e68hde958831b582fdac@mail.gmail.com> <200803081258.20381.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803081249s3584df43v1e53fe8dcbc11050@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Saturday 08 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > - Essentially and originally a hero is simply an individual denoted > > by a semi-divine status: in the Ancient Greece, an individual > > typically endowed by his genetic (!) peculiarity, as the hybrid > > offspring of a god and a human being, allowing and making him behave > > in a "heroic", i.e., extraordinary, way (reversing the myth, heroics > > of a given individual may make for a semi-divine status attributed > > to, and recognised in, him by the relevant community). Self-sacrifice > > Then we are led to think that a hero is one who has achieved divinity? No, heroes were definitely not gods. Rather, they were considered as semi-divine, and of partial divine descent, out of what they did. Yes, while this is far from acceptance-of-self-injury, it is still > self-injury, no? You still injure yourself by continuing to live, yes? > You continue to face the possibility of evolutionary failure, you have > that taste of the infinite. But this 'injury' is only natural, and so > we know that it is not, in fact, injury, but rather the way of life ... > but we also know that we can change this so-called 'way', that we can > recreate it to our liking. Agreed. > But do we > not, to some extent, determine our own fate? Absolutely. And, after a fashion, a hero (say, Achilles) determines his fate. Of course, now we can think of and hope for a quantum leap in our fate-determining skills... :-) > > > - Even in the everyday concept of hero, heroics have more to do with > > the idea of "putting oneself fully into play", "being the living > > incarnation of a cause", or "consciously accepting the related > > risks", than with personal self-sacrifice, which is at most a > > possible, and certainly not deliberately and masochistically sought, > > outcome of such a position. > > If we are to put ourselves into the realm of play, then why not do it to > the best of our ability? > Absolutely. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From xuenay at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 21:04:33 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 23:04:33 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Vita-More: Transhumanism on the Rise In-Reply-To: <20080308205435.BCFB13220.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <20080308205435.BCFB13220.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803081304y1c77b7cfy50bd9f9fa328c969@mail.gmail.com> On 3/8/08, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > http://memebox.com/futureblogger http://memebox.com/futureblogger/show/98 for the direct link to the article - it looks like it'll get pushed off the front page pretty quickly. -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 8 21:13:18 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 14:13:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" In-Reply-To: <004101c8815d$2a5ba590$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <2d6187670803081230m3ecd51ccnf409a47bdb7cc8f2@mail.gmail.com> <004101c8815d$2a5ba590$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <2d6187670803081313y706f4e69qf86f4ceda37614d6@mail.gmail.com> I think it would be an excellent idea to have at least one of the following merit badges created, "Sexual Harrassment (now even a big issue for teens)," "Respect for Women in the Modern World," and/or "Gender Relations." And hey, maybe even a "Dating" merit badge! John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 8 21:08:44 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 13:08:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] where is den otter?; was [injure thread: RE: Personal "backgrounds" and allegedrelevance] In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803081029r4d224855w9aa2342e9ac05b02@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803082135.m28LZSN3022325@andromeda.ziaspace.com> ... On Behalf Of John Grigg Subject: Re: [ExI] injure thread: RE: Personal "backgrounds" and allegedrelevance Spike wrote: Do not feel the need to explain it to me however. On the contrary, feel free to let this thread perish at this point...Each poster is judged only on the posts that person puts here. Accusations regarding anyone's political leanings outside this list are not welcome nor helpful. >>> >I'm personally confused as to Stefano's real personal history in relation to Fascism... Johnny, do post to Stefano offlist for this kind of information. The personal backgrounds thread is slain. Too flamey. ... > Does anyone remember Den Otter? hmmm... John Grigg Heck yes we remember den Otter. Where did he go? Anyone here know him? John do you remember where he was from? Denmark? spike From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 8 22:23:48 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 14:23:48 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <024c01c8816b$96025c40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I had hoped not to be lured into this discussion, but the Griggster has dangled an irresistable science fiction gem :-) > Lee Corbin wrote: > > Of course, there are many who will never believe that anything > > outside their own skin can be the same person that they are, > > and for them, your example isn't of any use. Too bad. Because > > in one sentence you've summarized exactly how personal identity > > will be handled in the future. Continuity! Continuity! Continuity! lol Yeah? Yeah? Well, I hope you've read my "Continuity of Identity: The Last Refuge of the Soul" (http://www.leecorbin.com/LastRefuge.html) > The scientist who had argued that a perfect copy was not to be confused > with the original very calmly takes a 44 magnum handgun from a desk > drawer, points it at the head of the original scientist (not the perfect in > all respects copy of him), and says, "now just how certain are you that > your life is utterly indistinguishable from your perfect copy?" LOL Hey, on pain of losing an instance of me, I'd say whatever I thought he wanted to hear! But make the stakes really worth while (either I or my duplicate dies, but if it's "me" then $10M is deposited to my account), and I won't flinch a bit when you point the gun. Now THIS is precious (thanks, John!): There was an Outer Limits episode where a race of very technologically advanced and yet pacifistic (roughly human-sized) Saurians came to the aid of a very polluted and over-populated Earth that is barely surviving. The aliens hold out the promise of new worlds to explore and colonize due to the amazing "teleportation" machines that they are willing to share with us. But their alien mentality is brought out [Well, they really are more advanced than we and do understand better LOL] when a female human scientist is "teleported" to one of their worlds but the original woman is left alive. It turns out their "teleportation devices" are simply a very sophisticated duplication technology! They take it for granted that the original traveler at point A is to be killed/vaporized (according to their laws) as soon as the copy is successfully created at point B. The idea of having multiple copies of the same being running around is seen as highly unethical by the aliens [Now that IS sick] and so they demand the death of the women, or they will withdraw their support from humanity. ...The reptilian Saurians, who despite being pacificists, still appear to be very cold and callous by human standards. [Yeah, they don't understand that we're not all up to speed on identity, LOL!] > Stories can sometimes be good food for thought. John : ) Ooooh, I wish I'd seen that one. I came up with the very same thought experiment in 1967 to convince a friend of mine that there was a serious issue concerning identity. "Teleportation With Delay", or something like that, I call it. But the Outer Limits may very well have beat me to it, if it was the old B&W series shown in the 60's. Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 8 22:47:31 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:47:31 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <024c01c8816b$96025c40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> <024c01c8816b$96025c40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308163854.0235cf68@satx.rr.com> At 02:23 PM 3/8/2008 -0800, Lee wrote: >The reptilian Saurians, who despite > being pacificists, still appear to be very cold and callous by > human standards. > [Yeah, they don't understand that we're not all up to speed on > identity, LOL!] > >Ooooh, I wish I'd seen that one. Read it: Jim Kelly's famous award-winning 1995 story "Think like a dinosaur". Used to be online somewhere, probably ASIMOV'S site. Kelly's own site notes: "Barry Malzberg wrote me to ask if I had intended to borrow from Algis Budrys' ROUGE MOON." (That's the famous novel about teleporting homosexuals... oh, no, wait--it's really 1959's ROGUE MOON, aka THE DEATH MACHINE, and it's not only a teleporter it's explicitly a duplicator. Anyone who hasn't read the Budrys classic should run not walk.) Damien Broderick From ablainey at aol.com Sun Mar 9 00:55:12 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:55:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Monkey Experiment, (or) "Why Do We Do That?" In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803081230m3ecd51ccnf409a47bdb7cc8f2@mail.gmail.com> References: <000f01c880ae$e9f65940$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <2d6187670803081230m3ecd51ccnf409a47bdb7cc8f2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CA4F975D754D64-12AC-647@WEBMAIL-DC06.sysops.aol.com> From: John Grigg I hope in time the?Boy Scout leadership will?change their mind regarding having a martial?arts merit badge. John I'm not sure if I agree with the idea of a martial arts merit badge. In principle it sound like a good idea, but the virtues gained from martial arts are attained slowly at a controlled pace. Or certainly should be if the practitioner manages to avoid the rainbow belt Mc'Dojo's which are far too numerous. I don't think much can be taught in the time scale of gaining a merit badge other than basic self defence. Which doesn't begin to cover the self respect and self control issues. Still if it is coupled with the grade system so a Scout could only start his badge when they have attained a certain grade, then this would be very good. Personally I would rather see kids attending both Scouts and a decent dojo. Alex ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 9 02:05:05 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:05:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "Thoughts without a Thinker" re: Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <8CA4FA120775272-448-897@webmail-nf08.sim.aol.com> I wrote: " Thoughts of heroism entails this curiosity to know the unknown > without fear of failure or hope for success. You wrote: "As much as I think your ideas are close to the mark, I don't think this would work out." To paraphrase the first sentence above, in a society of minds, there is none independent of thought. Curiosity is a consequence of a desire to know so it seems circular when the cause {heroism} is the effect of suffering or vice versa. You wrote: " Suppose we had brain interfacing technology and had a massive supercomputer the size of Jupiter decyphering the brain state of our hero, and found that he was, in fact, hoping for a brief 3 seconds at one point in his so-called 'heroic' journey. Does that then mean that he is no longer a hero, for that briefest of thought? I would hope the answer is no. " There is only the journey irrespective of success or failure. Terry From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 9 03:05:43 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 19:05:43 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com><002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm><01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome><47D22773.1020102@pobox.com><470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com><01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com><024c01c8816b$96025c40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080308163854.0235cf68@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <026c01c88192$e5b8f010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I did read ROGUE MOON way back around 1967 or so. He had the basic idea of duplicates and all, one about to die says something like "Tell XXX that I love her too." But it did *not* get to the paradoxical aspect, and so I found it frustrating. Star Trek with their teleporters came out a bit later, and that was so good for helping to convince people that duplication via atomic disintegration was at least imaginable. >>The reptilian Saurians, who despite >> being pacificists, still appear to be very cold and callous by >> human standards. > Read it: Jim Kelly's famous award-winning 1995 story "Think like a > dinosaur". Used to be online somewhere, probably ASIMOV'S site. But was the Outer Limits story based on *that* one? I.e., was the Outer Limits story from 1995+? Lee >>The reptilian Saurians, who despite >> being pacificists, still appear to be very cold and callous by >> human standards. >> [Yeah, they don't understand that we're not all up to speed on >> identity, LOL!] >> >>Ooooh, I wish I'd seen that one. > > Read it: Jim Kelly's famous award-winning 1995 story "Think like a > dinosaur". Used to be online somewhere, probably ASIMOV'S site. > Kelly's own site notes: "Barry Malzberg wrote me to ask if I had > intended to borrow from Algis Budrys' ROUGE MOON." (That's the famous > novel about teleporting homosexuals... oh, no, wait--it's really > 1959's ROGUE MOON, aka THE DEATH MACHINE, and it's not only a > teleporter it's explicitly a duplicator. Anyone who hasn't read the > Budrys classic should run not walk.) > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 9 03:14:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:14:36 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <026c01c88192$e5b8f010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <01DEB8FB51D34515B3F7BE516CD4A359@HeMMhome> <47D22773.1020102@pobox.com> <470a3c520803080054l25a8c082od1f1c96ee99782fd@mail.gmail.com> <01a601c88138$af2d1c60$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <2d6187670803081150t603472e9xf5df1f41896dde39@mail.gmail.com> <024c01c8816b$96025c40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080308163854.0235cf68@satx.rr.com> <026c01c88192$e5b8f010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080308211313.022025f8@satx.rr.com> At 07:05 PM 3/8/2008 -0800, you wrote: > > Read it: Jim Kelly's famous award-winning 1995 story "Think like a > > dinosaur". > >But was the Outer Limits story based on *that* one? Well, if you're thinking of the 2001 Outer Limits ep titled "Think like a dinosaur," why, yes. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 9 06:21:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 22:21:54 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Hobbesian Politics References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com><470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com><009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede><580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com><007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com><015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080308101730.024264f8@satx.rr.com> <580930c20803080955ldc2b7f0t6ac822125c4ccbca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <02c601c881ae$42842bf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stefano writes > In fact, the alliance between theocons and > neocons has been found paradoxical by a few > commentators, the former term referring in > principle to those who are close to Evangelic > Catholic religious fundamentalism, the latter > to those, especially in the US, who are closer > to Machiavelian, Hobbesian, "raison d'?tat", > "amoral", "post-ideological" politics, if not to > mere political coverage of vested interests, > where old-style conservative values, let alone > religion, may have become more of a rhetoric > tool than a shared, good-faith worldview. I think I understood almost all of that except what you mean by "Hobbesian". At least you (and presumably) many others are highly critical of Hobbes. Why? I did find this: http://history.wisc.edu/sommerville/367/367-092.htm but don't see anything that jumps out at me as objectionable (a rather quick scan, though). Comments, anyone? Thanks, Lee From dharris234 at mindspring.com Sun Mar 9 09:17:44 2008 From: dharris234 at mindspring.com (David C. Harris) Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:17:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] first step as principle investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47D3AB38.1080901@mindspring.com> Congratulations, Amara! I'm so glad your powerful talents are being recognized with financial support. Yay! - David Harris, Palo Alto Amara Graps wrote: > Hi Extropes, > > The nine months I spent last year writing government grant proposals > wasn't for nothing, this morning I learned that my last NASA proposal > will be funded (a small project: 4 months per year for two years). This > is my first research proposal where I'm the 'principle investigator'. > > This means that I'm part-way on the road now to being a self-funded > planetary astronomer. After making my large move to a 2 year salary > position, this funding source isn't necessary for my life now, but > it does give me a buffer while I gain more practice writing proposals > and submit several more like this one, so that I can be completely > self-funded when my current SwRI position ends. > > I've pasted the topic below. > > Amara > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > The Development of the Saturnian Dust Streams > > Interplanetary dust streams are highly collimated, high-velocity > submicron particles that can extend over several A.U. They arise from > the coupling of planetary magnetic fields and sources of dust production > in circumplanetary environments. The first streams were detected > emanating from the Jupiter system by the Ulysses mission in 1992. They > were detected continually inside of Jupiter's magnetosphere and dozens > of times in interplanetary space by the Ulysses, Galileo and Cassini > spacecraft. Dust streams emanating from the Saturn system were detected > by the Cassini Cosmic Dust Analyser (CDA) in 2004, at a distance of half > an A.U., and they continue to be detected as Cassini orbits Saturn. > Graps \cite{Graps:2000a}\ identified Io as the dominant source of the > Jovian dust stream particles, but the source or sources of Saturnian > dust stream particles is unknown. Possibilities to be investigated > include (but are not limited to) Enceladus geysers, fragmented E~ring > particles, and collisional fragments from the Main rings. CDA includes a > time-of-flight mass spectrometer, providing compositional information > not available from Galileo and Ulysses, which will provide new insights > and constraints to address particle source issues. > > The coupling of the planetary magnetic fields and their sources of dust > production has been found to have large physical consequences in the > Jovian and Saturnian magnetospheres. Given the prodigious quantity of > dust produced, Graps \cite{Graps:2006a}\ and others \cite{Wahl:2006}\ > have indicated that dust production in both the Jupiter and Saturn > systems may be large enough that conditions would exist for dusty > plasmas, which lead to collective behavior of the dust particles. This > can be a factor in the formation of dust streams. This coupling of the > planetary magnetic fields and their sources of dust production also > leaves its imprint on the dust streams' signature in frequency space, > allowing one to study the source of the dust streams. > > Not all dust destined to escape in streams from a circumplanetary region > escape immediately. The time for a particle to charge up and accelerate > gives a residential lifetime to the smallest particles in the vicinity > of their host. Such a temporary residence of a population of tiny > particles can be a hazard to objects in the vicinity (instruments, > people), as well as a source dust population for other physical > processes (e.g., impact related). Once these particles escape into > streams into interplanetary space, they have been correlated with the > leading edges of high-speed solar wind streams (called corotating > interaction regions or CIRs) and the Sun's coronal mass ejections > (CMEs), adding further to the complexity of their dynamical evolution. > > We propose to quantify the conditions under which collimated dust > streams form and evolve in the Saturn system to reproduce the CDA > observations and compare it to the generation of dust streams in the > Jupiter system. Objectives include: > > \begin{itemize} > \item Determine the sources of dust stream particles from the Saturn > system with frequency analysis and modeling and compare them to those of > Jovian dust stream particles. Can dust production required for streams > be generalized to other solar system bodies (e.g., geysers on Triton)? > \item Model the contribution of both planetary and solar magnetic fields > to the formation and evolution of dust streams. > \item Determine the time evolutionary state of the spatial density and > particle size distribution of stream particles within the Saturn > magnetosphere. > \item Determine the locations and (plasma, dust) parameters of dusty > plasma conditions and their impact in the formation of dust streams. > \end{itemize} > > The analysis of Cassini datasets with a focus on the Saturnian dust > streams is valuable for understanding the dust streams' source, for > understanding the dynamical development of the streams, and for > predicting where we might detect streams elsewhere, thereby realizing > the objective of the Cassini Data Analysis Program (CDAP) of enhancing > the scientific return of the Cassini mission. This project supports > NASA's Strategic Goals by Strategic Sub-goal 3C, it contributes to the > NASA Science Outcomes 3B.1, as well as Science Outcomes 3B.3. As cosmic > dust is both a building block and by-product of solar system > evolutionary processes, this project also contributes to NASA's Science > Outcomes: 3C.1. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 11:35:03 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 12:35:03 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Today in Second Life: Natasha Vita-More & Anders Sandberg: Do individual humans have a natural right to Morphological Freedom - the right to seek augmentation and enhancement - and the right not to be coerced to augment and enhance? Message-ID: <470a3c520803090435k73d0352u4b4995767667e4d1@mail.gmail.com> Join us on today March 9, 12:00-13:30 SLT (noon PST, 3pm EST, 9pm EU, 8pm UK) for a seminar on Morphological Freedom in Second Life, by Natasha Vita-More & Anders Sandberg: Do individual humans have a natural right to Morphological Freedom - the right to seek augmentation and enhancement - and the right not to be coerced to augment and enhance? Natasha and Anders are two of the principal transhumanist thinkers. Natasha has given a good definition of transhumanism in a recent interview: "Transhumanism is a set of ideas which represents a worldview to improve the current situation that we as humanity are facing, which includes short lifespan, limited cognitive abilities, limited sensoral abilities, erratic emotions?starvation, lack of housing, or lack of, basically, getting any of the necessary fundamental needs met. We look ardently at how technologies, including the NBIC technologies?nanoscience, bioscience, information science, and cognitive science ? can possibly be used to help solve some of the problems in the world that address humans being stuck in a state of stasis." See also Anders' recent list of top genetic enhancements that have already been done in mammals (and hence could presumbaly be done in humans). Don't miss this talk: SUNDAY, MARCH, 9th 12:00-13:30 SLT in Second Life SL-Transhumanists @ extropia core http://translook.com/ http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/today_natasha_vita_more_anders_sandberg_on_morphological_freedom_in_second/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 12:13:20 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 13:13:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Hobbesian Politics In-Reply-To: <02c601c881ae$42842bf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <4eaaa0d90803070141t62db8419ge74ce735e7dad873@mail.gmail.com> <470a3c520803070343i6b9a268dx528c067e6a53d8bf@mail.gmail.com> <009b01c8805a$4c4659b0$2a921f97@archimede> <580930c20803070819v5a85a504q491a42f9bae8dce9@mail.gmail.com> <007901c88081$b0bf6950$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803071500t1887aa0axdacb97e93b556f1b@mail.gmail.com> <015501c88135$2d42a010$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080308101730.024264f8@satx.rr.com> <580930c20803080955ldc2b7f0t6ac822125c4ccbca@mail.gmail.com> <02c601c881ae$42842bf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803090513q7e45b6aew4cbd4cdecfeafb7f@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I think I understood almost all of that except > what you mean by "Hobbesian". At least you > (and presumably) many others are highly > critical of Hobbes. Why? > Mmhhh. I am somewhat critical of Hobbesian positions, but of course he is a major thinker in the European political tradition, and his works can be read from many different angles, so that it would be difficult to quickly label him in Manichean fashion. For instance, many people take him as a theorist of absolutism, other underline that he establishes a secular, realistic and consensual foundation to the human society against the openly metaphysical stances of his opponents of the time. In fact, speaking of the right/left split, I believe he has fans in both camps. My casual reference to Hobbes in my previous post simply implies that neocons may be closer to Hobbes than, say, to Locke. But I also said that they would be per se more likely to be indifferent or favourable to technology. This of course is not intended as a disqualification of either Hobbes or technology, even though I am pretty far from an American neocon myself. :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 15:55:57 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 08:55:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] where is den otter?; was [injure thread: RE: Personal "backgrounds" and allegedrelevance] In-Reply-To: <200803082135.m28LZSN3022325@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803081029r4d224855w9aa2342e9ac05b02@mail.gmail.com> <200803082135.m28LZSN3022325@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803090855u1b78ab2do7441058efc6e11fe@mail.gmail.com> I was thinking Den Otter was from Germany/Switzerland. But I could be completely wrong. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 9 16:10:59 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:10:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] where is den otter? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803090855u1b78ab2do7441058efc6e11fe@mail.gmail.co m> References: <2d6187670803081029r4d224855w9aa2342e9ac05b02@mail.gmail.com> <200803082135.m28LZSN3022325@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803090855u1b78ab2do7441058efc6e11fe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080309110731.023dec90@satx.rr.com> At 08:55 AM 3/9/2008 -0700, JG wrote: >I was thinking Den Otter was from Germany/Switzerland. But I could >be completely wrong. He's Dutch. And hey, the first google entry on him I found starts: His departure from the extropes list was much appreciated. Damien Broderick From sparge at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 15:36:00 2008 From: sparge at gmail.com (Spargemeister) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 10:36:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Best Distributed Computing Project to Support In-Reply-To: <000c01c878e8$9281b920$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <000c01c878e8$9281b920$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:29 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > > I've currently got a 3.6 Ghz Pentium 4 and 1 core of an Intel 2.4 Ghz Q6600 > crunching Folding at Home. There's an Extropy.org Folding at Home team (#346) that's been active for several years. > I'm thinking of buying a Playstation 3 to do Folding at Home on also. I > understand that the IBM cell processor and > the software written to do Folding at Home on the Playstation with help from > Sony runs crunches proteins many > times faster than a Quad Core PC. Yeah, I bought myself one recently and it really cranks out the WUs. With the PS3 contribution, F at H broke the petaflops mark last fall. -Dave From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Mar 9 17:51:55 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 12:51:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Sandberg and Vita-More in Second Life Now! Message-ID: <20080309175157.EFZD13797.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Now in Second Life: http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/natasha_vita_more_anders_sandberg_on_morphological_freedom_in_second_life_m/ http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/slt/sl_transhumanists/ MORPHOLOGICAL FREEDOM: The ability to alter bodily form at will through technologies such as surgery, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, uploading. [Max More, April 1992] To learn more about what morphological freedom means, here are a few links: http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/Texts/MorphologicalFreedom.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 20:23:08 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 16:23:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <62c14240803091323m35c22992h442e7c910fdcb50c@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Jef Allbright wrote: > > It would just be something that thinks it's me. The "me" must be > transferred > > to the "new me", not copied, more like uninstalling my software and > > installing it somewhere else. > > Oh no! Not again! ;-) > I wonder what about this thread evokes this response from those who have done it to death, yet compels those same participants to leap into the fray for another round. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 9 20:45:53 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:45:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?EU_throws_=E2=82=AC5=2E5bn_at_embedded_chips_and_?= =?utf-8?q?nanotech?= Message-ID: <580930c20803091345x59239ee5ib3541b3532e95572@mail.gmail.com> EU throws ?5.5bn at embedded chips and nanotechAnoints tech industry with fat wad of cashBy Kelly Fiveash ? More by this author The European Union is to pump billions of euros into a number of key technology projects to bolster Europe's nanotech and embedded systems industries over the next decade. The European Commission (EC) is coughing up a staggering ?2.5bn in industrial research in embedded microcomputers. The joint technology initiative, dubbed ARTEMIS, was given the green light by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers at the end of last year. EU Information society and media commissioner Viviane Reding described the public and private R&D investment in embedded systems, used in the likes of credit cards, mobile phones and cars, as a "very worthwhile" project. She claims the ten-year initiative will help push European development in the field of microcomputers to the forefront. The EC said that over four billion embedded processors were sold in the global market last year, worth ?60bn. It predicts annual growth rates of 14 per cent for the technology. Public funding will be pooled with universities and industry under an ARTEMIS open consortium to provide industry-led pan-European research and development. Private firms including Airbus, Ericsson AB, Nokia Corporation and ST Microelectronics currently sit on the Artemis board, and will, apparently, be balanced by public stakeholders. The EU's investment in nanoelectronicswill be even bigger. The EC ? which estimates an eight to ten per cent growth rate in the semiconductor industry over the coming years ? said it would stump up a massive ?3bn on R&D in miniature electronic devices over the next ten years under a joint private-public initiative called ENIAC. Reding said: "The possibilities offered by nanoelectronics are only limited by our imagination. They underpin all aspects of everyday devices and so concern everyone in Europe." She added that the huge investment was "a concrete way to ensure that such a key industrial sector continues its strong economic growth, right here in Europe". In May last year the EU explained the rationale behind its decision to provide the tech industry with funding through a mixture of private and public investment. It said in a statement: "The rapid pace of technological change, the rising costs of research, the increasing complexity and interdependence of technologies, and the potential economies of scale to be gained by cooperation across Europe are all strong reasons for setting up long-term public-private partnerships." Presumably, the industry ? in the EU at least ? will broadly welcome the EU's decision to sink such huge sums of cash into important sectors of the technology market. How non-EU companies and governments will view the funding plans is a different matter. The EC has also announced plans to stick its beak into creating a peer-to-peer system that can pipe programmes to set-top boxes and home televisions, which is likely to be met with a collective shrug of the shoulders from the industry. The EU will spend ?19m over the next four years on P2P Next, which is built on Tribler technology and is currently under development at Delft University of Technology. EC officials hope that, in partnership with the likes of the Beeb and the European Broadcasting Union, a standard way of sending TV via the internet can be set up. But it's a small-fry, arguably short-sighted project compared to the EU's grand-scale nanotech and microcomputers investments. And it's an initiative which fails to address the fact that the market-led IPTV standard is already a reality, and an area that European ISPs such as BT Vision and Tiscali are continuing to spend and focus heavily on. (R) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/26/eu_joint_technology_initiatives/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 10 05:06:44 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 23:06:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Boing Boing: "Debate round brain enhancement" Message-ID: If I had REMEMBERED that clocks needed to be set forward, then I would not have been an hour late this morning, therefore, this discussion seems particularly appropriate today: "Debate round brain enhancement" http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/09/debate-around-brain.html where David Pescovitz says: "At O'Reilly's Emerging Technology Conference last week, I hosted a panel on the future of "mind hacks," from cognitive fitness programs to smart drugs to neuro-implants. One of the panelists was Timo Hannay, publishing director of Nature.com, who talked about a recent heated debate taking place on the journal's site around the ethics of using brain drugs for wakefulness, focus, and other cognitive "enhancements." Nature is continuing that discussion with a public "brain boosting drugs" survey. Today's New York Times "Week In Review" takes a look at the controversy." Amara P.S. yeah yeah preaching to the crowd. But it's nice to see a 'debate' about it in the mainstream journals! -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Mar 10 10:24:04 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:24:04 +0100 Subject: [ExI] SL-Transhumanists Today in Second Life: Natasha Vita-More & Anders Sandberg: Do individual humans have a natural right to Morphological Freedom - the right to seek augmentation and enhancement - and the right not to be coerced to augment and enha Message-ID: <470a3c520803100324y27da3e83x2a4d4ec69c381672@mail.gmail.com> Here is my report on yesterday's seminar with pictures, video clip and some side discussions http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/today_natasha_vita_more_anders_sandberg_on_morphological_freedom_in_second/ Note the call for volunteers to organize weekly events. G. On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > Join us on today March 9, 12:00-13:30 SLT (noon PST, 3pm EST, 9pm EU, > 8pm UK) for a seminar on Morphological Freedom in Second Life, by > Natasha Vita-More & Anders Sandberg: Do individual humans have a > natural right to Morphological Freedom - the right to seek > augmentation and enhancement - and the right not to be coerced to > augment and enhance? > > Natasha and Anders are two of the principal transhumanist thinkers. > Natasha has given a good definition of transhumanism in a recent > interview: "Transhumanism is a set of ideas which represents a > worldview to improve the current situation that we as humanity are > facing, which includes short lifespan, limited cognitive abilities, > limited sensoral abilities, erratic emotions?starvation, lack of > housing, or lack of, basically, getting any of the necessary > fundamental needs met. We look ardently at how technologies, including > the NBIC technologies?nanoscience, bioscience, information science, > and cognitive science ? can possibly be used to help solve some of the > problems in the world that address humans being stuck in a state of > stasis." See also Anders' recent list of top genetic enhancements that > have already been done in mammals (and hence could presumbaly be done > in humans). > > Don't miss this talk: > > SUNDAY, MARCH, 9th 12:00-13:30 SLT in Second Life SL-Transhumanists @ > extropia core > http://translook.com/ > http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/today_natasha_vita_more_anders_sandberg_on_morphological_freedom_in_second/ > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SL-transhumanists" group. > To post to this group, send email to sl-transhumanists at googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sl-transhumanists-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sl-transhumanists?hl=en > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > > From painlord2k at yahoo.it Mon Mar 10 14:34:56 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:34:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Can the pope stop technological self-transformation? In-Reply-To: <200803061650.12418.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <4eaaa0d90802290223m380491efh371e692566978a8d@mail.gmail.com> <200802291849.04618.kanzure@gmail.com> <47D001C2.90302@yahoo.it> <200803061650.12418.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47D54710.4020503@yahoo.it> Bryan Bishop ha scritto: > On Thursday 06 March 2008, Mirco Romanato wrote: >> Bryan Bishop ha scritto: >>> On Friday 29 February 2008, Damien Broderick wrote: >>>>> What power? Money? They certainly don't have supercomputers, >>>>> they don't have massive research institutions, they don't have >>>>> neurofarms, the only power they have is lots of listeners and a >>>>> widely distributed mental program. What does this power have to >>>>> do with transhumanism? >>>> Uh oh. Have you never heard of Stalin's famous contemptuous taunt: >>>> "How many divisions does the Pope have?" >>> No, I hadn't, but what difference does it make how many the Pope >>> has? >> The answer is "He has none, but he can take ours." (the Poles, the >> Ukrainians....). > > Ours are of the mind and our own bodies. Tell me, can he take our minds? He can talk and he is listened by many. Somebody is impervious to his talk and arguments, but many others are not. In the Stalin case, the catholic poles, Ukrainians and others would do an undependable army that could not fight an aggressive war or worse, rebel or sabotage the struggle. In the case of the Pope (and the Catholic Church), one of their main point is to be able to exploit the weakness of their adversaries. If they are able to provoke a reaction that cast a bad light over their adversaries and a good one on them, they win. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 10 18:26:16 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:26:16 -0600 Subject: [ExI] first step as principal investigator Message-ID: David C. Harris dharris234 at mindspring.com : >Congratulations, Amara! I'm so glad your powerful talents are being >recognized with financial support. Yay! Thank you. It _is_ a start. The four months/year for 2 years is not liveable yet, but this will improve when I write-win more grant proposals. One large improvement starting this year is that NASA is providing grants for 4 years instead of previous 2 and 3 three years, so one won't need, as often, to be writing grant proposals and performing the work for the proposals simultaneously (on weekends, nights, spare moments). The above probably illustrates why I would not recommend a woman to go into the sciences. Performing science is already hard; for a woman to balance both science and family is doubly so. I earned my PhD at age 40, I left financially-unlivable-no-future scientific conditions in Italy to recover with a two year fixed-term contract in the US. This is my 11th major astronomy group in which I've worked during the last 25 years: 18 years as a scientific programmer working for several astronomy teams at once, two-year-contracts at-a-time, and 7 years as a post-doc. I just completed my third international move in 10 years, my only pension is in the hands of the Italian government, and I have no savings (but no debt either). My family plans are in progress but I'm 15 years later than most people, who are in my position. If folks missed my link to Sabine's recent post: this fills out the rest of a typical life of a post-doc researcher. If you're a woman considering science, please talk to me before you embark on your exciting, (but very risky) journey. from Sabine at: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2008/03/brief-history-of-mine-iii.html Meaning I have to write applications - again - this fall. Which, after all these words, eventually brings me to the reason of my current tiredness. I've been in the field for more than ten years now. I've had contracts for a year, for 9 months, I've even had a contract for 6 months. I moved 5 times in 4 years. I have three different social security numbers, but I'm not sure if I'd qualify for either of their benefits (actually, I have four, but that's a longer story). Each summer I try to arrange my conference participation with meeting friends and family. My contact to them is an annual briefing with the essentials, who got married, divorced, died, lost his job, had children. I have no retirement plan, and my unemployment insurance is basically non-existing because I've never had a job in my home-country for more than a few months (the ones that I've had were tax-free scholarships which doesn't count). Since I've never had a regular income, no bank would sensibly lend me money. I vote in a country where I don't live and live in a country where I can't vote. I'm not telling you that because I want to complain; I am telling you that because my situation is in no means exceptional. That's just what it means to be a postdoc. In fact, I believe I am better off than many others. I could live with that - if there was an end in sight. [...] Why am I telling you that Because I see an increasing number of friends leaving the academic world. It hardly happens because they are not qualified enough, or because they discovered they lost their interest in physics. Neither does it happen because they couldn't find a job. In fact, they often quit a position they had. They just simply weren't willing to play these games of vanity any more. Many of them just want to have a job where their skills are appreciated appropriately - appropriately to their age and expertise - where they have a sensible contract, and at least some kind of stability and future options. So they go and work for the research departments of large companies, become teachers, work in counseling, in a bank, scientific publishing, for the weather service, or in a patent office. The good aspect is I don't know anybody with a PhD in theoretical physics who became unemployed. Theoretical physicists, so it seems, have the reputation of being good in solving problems, which makes them useful for a lot of different tasks. The bad aspect is that all these people are lost for foundational research. And that, folks, are the selection criteria currently applied to pick the 'brightest' and 'most promising' young researchers: Those who will do well should be completely convinced of their own ingenuity, flourish without much motivation, and perform well under high competitive pressure. They should be able and willing to think in one to three year plans - for work and for life -, have connections up the latter and use them, act politically and socially smart, and should be willing to work under other people's supervision until their mid thirties. Now I'll go back to bed and pull the blanket over my face. Thanks for listening in. -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 10 19:41:39 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:41:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fast Forward Radio: Ben Goertzel Message-ID: <29666bf30803101241g56985a56vc877ecd30e0c3bbb@mail.gmail.com> Hey all, Last night, Stephen Gordon and I interviewed Ben Goertzel about AI, AGI and his successful AGI '08 conference. http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001669.html PJ From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 10 21:27:59 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:27:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fast Forward Radio: Ben Goertzel In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803101241g56985a56vc877ecd30e0c3bbb@mail.gmail.co m> References: <29666bf30803101241g56985a56vc877ecd30e0c3bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310162548.024bdf80@satx.rr.com> At 12:41 PM 3/10/2008 -0700, PJ wrote: >Last night, Stephen Gordon and I interviewed Ben Goertzel about AI, >AGI and his successful AGI '08 conference. > >http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001669.html Some good, meaty stuff there, PJ, especially in the second half. It did strike me that if Ben were any more laid-back he'd have fallen off his chair, but hey, dude. :) Damien Broderick From jef at jefallbright.net Mon Mar 10 15:40:15 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 08:40:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Brain boosting drugs -- survey online Message-ID: This survey appears to be legitimate despite the suspicious-looking URL. - Jef From clementlawyer at hotmail.com Mon Mar 10 22:23:04 2008 From: clementlawyer at hotmail.com (James Clement) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:23:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Brain boosting drugs -- survey online In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jef wrote: > This survey appears to be legitimate despite the suspicious-looking URL. > > > Any idea whether the results will be published, and where? JWC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 10 22:57:59 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:57:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Brain boosting drugs -- survey online In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:23 PM, James Clement wrote: > Any idea whether the results will be published, and where? > The survey is being done for Nature magazine. See here: They say: UPDATE JAN 31ST: This week, Nature is publishing two pages of correspondence responding to the Sahakian and Morein-Zamir Commentary. We're also launching an anonymous online survey to build on the informal questionnaire that the Commentary authors sent to academics on the usage of brain boosting drugs. In aggregate, the survey results will guide future editorial content on this topic. Check back here for more updates.* ------------ So, the main intent is to help them with the magazine content. No word here on publishing results. But they might respond to an email enquiry???? BillK From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 10 23:06:06 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:06:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice Message-ID: <8CA511A74494F65-16E0-2BAB@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> "For there is suffering, but none who suffers; Doing exists although there is no doer. Extinction is but no extinguished person; Although there is a path, there is no goer. ? Visuddhimagga _________ Conventional thought/belief of a hero is one who sacrificed his life for the good of others. Sacrifice/suffering evidently exists but Visuddhimagga {a Buddhist philosopher?} stated there is none who suffers or no one dies/no life lost in the context of being a hero. Words like hero and suffering are thoughts, inter-subjective processes of cause and effect/interacting energies. We continually change as cells die and replace in the organ system of the body. Terry From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 10 23:08:38 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:08:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fast Forward Radio: Ben Goertzel In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310162548.024bdf80@satx.rr.com> References: <29666bf30803101241g56985a56vc877ecd30e0c3bbb@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080310162548.024bdf80@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803101608l183dcd64pf98fc99d0eadce7f@mail.gmail.com> I felt bad, because I was more low energy than usual and Stephen got flummoxed and none of us really had the energy we normally have. Yeah, Ben is very eccentric in his physical presentation with his cowboy hats, etc., but not so much so in his verbal/aural one. P On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > At 12:41 PM 3/10/2008 -0700, PJ wrote: > > >Last night, Stephen Gordon and I interviewed Ben Goertzel about AI, > >AGI and his successful AGI '08 conference. > > > >http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001669.html > > Some good, meaty stuff there, PJ, especially in the second half. It > did strike me that if Ben were any more laid-back he'd have fallen > off his chair, but hey, dude. :) > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 10 23:58:59 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:58:59 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' Message-ID: Good news, extropes! Your social preferences hit two of the top three on the Vatican's list of seven 'social sins'! From http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/10/vatican-comes-up-wit.html In the sixth century, Pope Gregory handed down a list of "seven cardinal vices." Now the Vatican has issued an additional seven "social sins." You offend God not only by stealing, taking the Lord's name in vain or coveting your neighbor's wife, but also by wrecking the environment, carrying out morally debatable experiments that manipulate DNA or harm embryos," said [Bishop Gianfranco] Girotti, who is responsible for the body that oversees confessions. The seven social sins are: 1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control 2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research 3. Drug abuse 4. Polluting the environment 5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor 6. Excessive wealth 7. Creating poverty -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From aiguy at comcast.net Tue Mar 11 00:30:38 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:30:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice In-Reply-To: <8CA511A74494F65-16E0-2BAB@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA511A74494F65-16E0-2BAB@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <004401c8830f$23d1a8b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Terry said: << "For there is suffering, but none who suffers; Doing exists although there is no doer. Extinction is but no extinguished person; Although there is a path, there is no goer. ? Visuddhimagga _________ Conventional thought/belief of a hero is one who sacrificed his life for the good of others. Sacrifice/suffering evidently exists but Visuddhimagga {a Buddhist philosopher?} stated there is none who suffers or no one dies/no life lost in the context of being a hero. Words like hero and suffering are thoughts, inter-subjective processes of cause and effect/interacting energies. We continually change as cells die and replace in the organ system of the body. >> I believe the author was as is typical in Buddhist and Hindu teachings speaking about the illusion of ego or self. When enlightenment is achieved the ego of self is gone for a time and one perceives the world one's being as having merged with all that is. This altered state is accompanied by a state of euphoria and great emotional and spiritual intensity. Although the state does not last long. It is deeply transformational due to it's intensity. And obviously highly addictive given that followers will study and devote years of their life in an attempt to attain this state if only for brief periods. Buddhists believed that if you entered this state prior to death then your self would not be required reincarnate and your cycle of rebirth was ended. A master of achieving such states (one who has trained to enter the state at will) is free from pain and desire because the seeming reality of the enlightened state seems much more real that what we know as everyday reality. I believe that this state of consciousness is the true goal of true mystics from faiths and religions. Of course the vast majority of any faith are followers and although they may be awe of the true mystics are not usually able to attain these states themselves. A true teachers goal is to help disciples attain this state. The objective reality of such states can not be proven scientifically. Indeed alternate explanations such as the release of internal pleasure chemicals in the brain is a tempting and somewhat plausible hypothesis but why does this state serve to convince those who experience it that it is this altered state which is reality and it is our normal everyday state that is the illusion? And why does this state inspire those who achieve it to start religions, form cults, and help others to achieve that same state. Such altruism may be viewed as a crucial ingredient for a hero. After all Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammad, probably serve as role models and heroes for more human beings on this planet than all others combined. And I know this sorely galls many folks here who blame religion for many of histories wars, atrocities and probably rightly so. But heroes lives serve as examples for the rest of us to live by. Can we blame a hero though for those who use their names and the stories of their lives to control others and manipulate their teachings for their own gain? Descending Soapbox now... From ABlainey at aol.com Tue Mar 11 00:47:27 2008 From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:47:27 EDT Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' Message-ID: That explains why I was off the christmas card list last year. ;o) In a message dated 10/03/2008 23:59:59 GMT Standard Time, amara at amara.com writes: > Good news, extropes! Your social preferences hit two of the top three > on the Vatican's list of seven 'social sins'! > > From > http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/10/vatican-comes-up-wit.html > > > > In the sixth century, Pope Gregory handed down a list of "seven cardinal > vices." Now the Vatican has issued an additional seven "social sins." > > You offend God not only by stealing, taking the Lord's name in > vain or coveting your neighbor's wife, but also by wrecking the > environment, carrying out morally debatable experiments that > manipulate DNA or harm embryos," said [Bishop Gianfranco] Girotti, > who is responsible for the body that oversees confessions. > > The seven social sins are: > > 1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control > > 2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research > > 3. Drug abuse > > 4. Polluting the environment > > 5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor > > 6. Excessive wealth > > 7. Creating poverty -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 11 01:53:51 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:53:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310204502.024e8960@satx.rr.com> At 05:58 PM 3/10/2008 -0600, Amara wrote: >Good news, extropes! Your social preferences hit two of the top three >on the Vatican's list of seven 'social sins'! I see that the Vatican's list does not include some candidates that leapt to my mind; for example, Running a Global Institution Supporting the Buggering of Little Boys in its Care, or Inculcating into the Minds of the Defenceless Arrant and Frightening Bullshit About Just about Everything. And yet, oddly enough, the Pope's seventh sin, Creating Poverty, is exactly what his own organization insists on committing with such mad claptrap as making their first sin "Bioethical" Violations Such as Birth Control. Damien Broderick From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 11 02:08:45 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:08:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reconceptualizing the hero myth Message-ID: <8CA5133F8B41B19-984-77A@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> "On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Max More wrote: > Department of Strategic Philosophy > Professor Max More > Course 510: Extropic Myth Analysis > > Your mission--should you choose to accept it--is to reconceptualize > the hero myth, removing the core element of self-sacrifice. ______________ Sorry, I cannot reconceptualize a hero to separate suffering from thought. Concepts/thoughts are still thoughts/ mind constructs. AGI is an artificial mind construct but none suffers in the micro level of elements like electrons, neutrons and neutrinos {the electrochemical language of the brain}. What is a mission, a motive? That too is a thought process arising from layers of brain matter coming from the top most layer going down to the lower layer/the emotional layer or the primitive region of the brain, the seat of emotion. Some said that emotions are what makes us humans. It goes to show that AGI is above the lower region of the brain. Terry From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 02:25:56 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:25:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Reconceptualizing the hero myth In-Reply-To: <8CA5133F8B41B19-984-77A@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5133F8B41B19-984-77A@webmail-nc17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803102125.56627.kanzure@gmail.com> On Monday 10 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Sorry, I cannot reconceptualize a hero to separate suffering from > thought. Concepts/thoughts are still thoughts/ mind constructs. > > AGI is an artificial mind construct but none suffers in the micro > level of elements like electrons, neutrons and neutrinos {the > electrochemical language of the brain}. > > What is a mission, a motive? That too is a thought process arising > from layers of brain matter coming from the top most layer going down > to the lower layer/the emotional layer or the primitive region of the > brain, the seat of emotion. I'd like to quote Zindell: > 'Without end,' Hanuman said. The pain of self-overcoming is just the > beginning. Then, for our kind, if we're strong enough, if our souls > are great and deep ? then comes the real pain. What's real pain, you > ask? The power to choose what we will. Having to choose. This terrible > freedom. These infinite possibilities. The taste for the infinite > spoiled by the possibility of evolutionary failure. Real pain is > knowing that you're going to die, all the while knowing that you don't > have to die.' 'But, Hanu, everything dies,' Danlo said softly. He > turned to face the scarred, old shih tree, and he pressed his forehead > against it. When he looked up, he felt the zig-zag mark where the > tree's icy bark had cut into his skin. Hanuman shook his head and > continued, 'But why die at all, Danlo? Mightn't there be a new phase > of evolution? A new kind of being? Can't you understand? I'm trying to > delineate an emergent quality of the brain. New synapses. New > connections. A constellation of qualities and abilities, of new levels > of existence. Consciousness heightened and exalted in itself, > purified. This pure consciousness that we really are. That we struggle > to be. For our kind, there's always the burning to be more. The > eternal longing. And this is why true human beings feel more pain. > Because we are more, but it's never quite enough ? never. And we are > aware of this neverness inside our souls. And aware of being aware. > There is a feedback. Can you understand what this is like? Pain is > magnified, infinitely. Each moment of time. Reality becomes almost too > real. It blazes. All the universe afire with the possibilities of > light, and madness, too. Real pain is the burning that never stops, > the frenzy, the lightning.' - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 02:28:28 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:28:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime Message-ID: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> I have been thinking about the implications of modal realism for my notion of personal identity, and arrived at the conclusion that absolutely identical copies and their "runtime" do not matter to me. Let's start with some background assumptions: There is an ensemble of structures/properties. Let's not discuss the meaning of "is". The ensemble contains all. Let's leave aside the meaning of "all". Some of the elements exhibit similarities, or correlations, such that it is possible to arrange the structures in orderly chains of elements. An element in a chain is apposed to similar elements that are either simpler or more complex. Since the number of more complex similar elements is always larger than the number of simpler similar elements, there is a certain direction along the chain, as well as branching from simpler to more complex elements. Each element is a state of our universe. Every event belongs to a tree of events that branches along an axis, which we call time. Whatever it means to "be", every event exhibits that property to the same degree. Past, present and future exist equally. Time is real, yet the ensemble of all events is timeless. This is the core of modal realism. Some small structures within events reflect, or correlate with, their surroundings.This special form of reflection or map of surroundings, is probably a necessary feature of awareness. In addition to correlations with surroundings, aware structures exhibit also the branching, time-axis type of correlation typical of all physical objects. Furthermore, there are higher-order correlations, or mappings present in some structures - a map of the structure itself, reflecting itself in a recursive way. This form of self-correlation may be the necessary (although perhaps not sufficient) condition for conscious experience. So you could say that consciousness is a property of self-correlated structures, existing timelessly as parts of the larger branching chains of world-states. It is possible to delineate highly complex, many-dimensional, treelike shapes, exhibiting these correlations and self-correlations, and being separate from other such timeless shapes. Each one of us is a shape like this, a miniature tree, or maybe I should say, a seedling of conscious life. So what is to be done about it? After all, if the shape is timeless, its extent in time cannot be changed. Its shape is immutable. You can't change anything! Well, a subjective experience of desire, and the experience of acting, do correlate with the shape of your past and future. If an omniscient observer were to investigate the brain structure at the base of the "tree", in a child, and find a desire for chocolate, the desire would certainly correlate with the parts of the tree corresponding to eating chocolate at later ages, going down the myriad branchings of the tree. Given time-like correlations between parts of the shape, similar inference could be performed from the future into the past, and laterally, among parts of the tree separated by space-like branching. Do I make myself clear? Can you imagine a tree-like, branching, mathematical shape, a monumentally huge graph, with every single thought and feeling you had, have, and will have in all possible worlds, represented simultaneously in its nodes? Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of your consciousness? Since every thought and desire correlates with the shape of the tree throughout its extent, I see my thoughts, desires and actions as a form of sculpture. It is as if time existed, and my decision to write this post changed the shape of some branches of my tree of life. Every thought, every action chisel out the shape of myself. The shape itself is timeless, yet what I do correlates with the past, and the future. As I wrote in the paragraph about time - time is nothing but the existence of correlations between world-states. Causation is nothing but correlation...if you know what I mean. In case some readers might see this as just my private ravings, this notion of causality is actually accepted by some notable philosophers, e.g. it is expounded upon by Daniel Dennett in "Freedom Evolves". So my thoughts *cause* the ylem to flow into the shape of my heart's desire! Thus I am the many-dimensional sculptor of my past, present and future. I do care about the size of my tree of life, which translated into time-speak means, I want to live longer. If some of my versions in at least some possible universes escape aging and live for thousands of years, it is like saying that my tree of life is tall. And those who would resolutely refuse life extension? Their trees are stunted, mere bushes, since in every possible universe they choose death. But what about all those copies and "runtime"? As I wrote above, each one of us corresponds to only one shape. Individual shapes my partially overlap, sharing some parts, and there are gazillions of physically distinguishable states in each "I", like very close relatives populating the googolplexes of universe-states, but there are no "copies". Just like there is only one square, there is only one of me-trees. You can't faithfully copy the mathematical being, a square. A square that is located in the same place, of the same size, with same relation to other mathematical shapes is still the same square. To make a copy you need to change its relationship to other structures - but maths is unchangeable. Math, the Platonic realm, can be only discovered, not changed. So if you try to make an identical copy of me, you can't do it. You can produce new nodes on my tree of life by exposing me to new stimuli - to say it timelessly, there may be correlations between your actions and the shape of my future but you can't copy the whole thing. A million brains running exactly the same thought, down to the quantum level or below, is only one brain. A million brains that are similar enough to produce the same macroscopic-level thoughts, words and actions but differing at the quantum scale may represent true copies but personally I don't care about them - they do not differ in the higher-order correlations I mentioned above as necessary for consciousness. Why bother running them if they don't materially change the shape of all my thoughts? I might object to such copies being tortured, since they would increase the measure of pain in the me-tree. Timelessly said, the preference inherent in my structure (hopefully) correlates with a small measure of quantum-level painful states and with a large number of interesting, or pleasant macrostates (i.e. groups of microstates corresponding to a single thought). Sorry for inundating you-all with these half-formed and wordy musings. I feel that I still have not wrapped my mind around the notions exposed above. Perhaps other parts of my tree of life, the ones located down the time-dimension, have a clearer understanding. Maybe this post does correlate with the existence of such mind-states. Only time will tell :) Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 02:41:14 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:41:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] first step as principal investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <62c14240803101941h15bfbc40w5158145b9b55cb01@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > The above probably illustrates why I would not recommend a woman to go > into the sciences. Performing science is already hard; for a woman to > balance both science and family is doubly so. I earned my PhD at age 40, [edit] > And that, folks, are the selection criteria currently applied to pick > the 'brightest' and 'most promising' young researchers: Those who will > do well should be completely convinced of their own ingenuity, flourish > without much motivation, and perform well under high competitive > pressure. They should be able and willing to think in one to three year > plans - for work and for life -, have connections up the latter and use > them, act politically and socially smart, and should be willing to work > under other people's supervision until their mid thirties. > Would you comment on why you changed from specifically "woman [...] in the sciences" to non-gendered "young researchers" ? It seems like the ideal candidate for the second lifestyle would be almost inherently at odds with the picture you describe in the first regardless of gender (or age for that matter) I had a paragraph worth of thoughts, but ran into evolutionary psychology dictating so much behavior that I was unable to continue. Instead I have to ask; for all our supposed advances, are we still so driven by our animal natures that we simply can't break away from gender roles? Does the human herd actively keep itself at the lowest common denominator by either bullying exceptions into conformity or isolating them until they no longer have the power to effect change? Please forgive it this sounds like an attack, it was not intended. Amara, your post struck a chord; a flood of ideas came to mind - few of which were coherent enough to capture in words. Maybe someone will respond to my semi-rhetorical stream of thought? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 03:05:49 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:05:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803102205.49187.kanzure@gmail.com> Rafal, you write well. I think many of us have had these exact same thoughts, but you took the initiative to write them out. Thank you. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From amara at amara.com Tue Mar 11 03:14:32 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:14:32 -0600 Subject: [ExI] first step as principal investigator Message-ID: >Would you comment on why you changed from specifically "woman [...] in the >sciences" to non-gendered "young researchers" ? I didn't write the latter part. I suggest to read Sabine's full post, to which I gave a link, and ask her questions about her writing at her blog. You can ask me questions about what I wrote, as well. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 03:19:02 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:19:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803102219.02669.kanzure@gmail.com> Ah, screw it. I have the time. :) Let's get down to business. On Monday 10 March 2008, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > I have been thinking about the implications of modal realism for my > notion of personal identity, and arrived at the conclusion that > absolutely identical copies and their "runtime" do not matter to me. You also have to account for divergence of your own self as well; does it matter to you that each moment you are changing? That each moment, you are no longer yourself? It has been said that "your effort to remain what you are is what limits you." But perhaps some people want to be limited, perhaps they want to stay the same? This is interesting because this leads down to stalemate, down to inaction, down to freezing yourself for all eternity so that you may never change again, to keeping the same moment running over and over again inside your head, which while an interesting offer, many of us here much rather prefer the real thing, yes. > Whatever it means to "be", every event exhibits that property to the > same degree. Past, present and future exist equally. Time is real, > yet the ensemble of all events is timeless. This is the core of modal > realism. Is it? I'll have to investigate this term, 'modal realism'. Is this the same as monads? > Some small structures within events reflect, or correlate with, their > surroundings.This special form of reflection or map of surroundings, > is probably a necessary feature of awareness. In addition to I do not see this as necessary for the ideas that you go on to discuss. How can you have a map of your surroundings? The map is not the territory. In Leibniz's monadology, he had an infinite number of monads that each contained all infinities of monads and all of their maps, on and on and on without end, but how could this be? > correlations with surroundings, aware structures exhibit also the > branching, time-axis type of correlation typical of all physical > objects. Furthermore, there are higher-order correlations, or > mappings present in some structures - a map of the structure itself, > reflecting itself in a recursive way. This form of self-correlation Perhaps mappings and meanings are the fundamentals themselves? > may be the necessary (although perhaps not sufficient) condition for > conscious experience. So you could say that consciousness is a > property of self-correlated structures, existing timelessly as parts > of the larger branching chains of world-states. It is possible to Is consciousness necessarily so fundamental? In answer to my own question, I suppose it would have to be, otherwise you are not really philosophizing, are you? > delineate highly complex, many-dimensional, treelike shapes, > exhibiting these correlations and self-correlations, and being > separate from other such timeless shapes. Each one of us is a shape > like this, a miniature tree, or maybe I should say, a seedling of > conscious life. But as you go on to later mention, we cannot know this shape, or the nature of the seed in its entirety, but this isn't so much of an issue. > Do I make myself clear? Can you imagine a tree-like, branching, > mathematical shape, a monumentally huge graph, with every single > thought and feeling you had, have, and will have in all possible > worlds, represented simultaneously in its nodes? Like a GLUT (Giant > Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only you, the one and unique > representation and the time/place of your consciousness? > > Since every thought and desire correlates with the shape of the tree > throughout its extent, I see my thoughts, desires and actions as a > form of sculpture. It is as if time existed, and my decision to write > this post changed the shape of some branches of my tree of life. > Every thought, every action chisel out the shape of myself. The shape Egan explored this concept as well. He wrote that if you are a mathematician shuffling neurons around in your brain, you have just created a new part of reality, since you're calculating new forms of mathematics that might not have otherwise ever been applicable in the first place. So, if creation/action is fundamental (thanks Feynman), then you are indeed chiseling away, or perhaps adding and being more constructive? It would be interesting to explore the idea of everybody starting off as a vague mass/chunk of possibility, and then our jobs are realizing the entire set of possibilities, and if we can't do that, then we have to chisel away some of the fluff and get down to business, where we all end up in specialized niches in the end, no? > itself is timeless, yet what I do correlates with the past, and the > future. As I wrote in the paragraph about time - time is nothing but > the existence of correlations between world-states. Causation is > nothing but correlation...if you know what I mean. In case some > readers might see this as just my private ravings, this notion of There are definitely indications of Aristotle's fourth cause, the 'final cause', a sort of tautology, which deserves more exploration in the context of extropic philosophy. > Thus I am the many-dimensional sculptor of my past, present and > future. I do care about the size of my tree of life, which translated > into time-speak means, I want to live longer. If some of my versions > in at least some possible universes escape aging and live for > thousands of years, it is like saying that my tree of life is tall. > And those who would resolutely refuse life extension? Their trees are > stunted, mere bushes, since in every possible universe they choose > death. Indeed, they did not follow the maximum entropy production principles. > As I wrote above, each one of us corresponds to only one shape. > Individual shapes my partially overlap, sharing some parts, and there > are gazillions of physically distinguishable states in each "I", like > very close relatives populating the googolplexes of universe-states, > but there are no "copies". Just like there is only one square, there > is only one of me-trees. You can't faithfully copy the mathematical > being, a square. A square that is located in the same place, of the > same size, with same relation to other mathematical shapes is still > the same square. To make a copy you need to change its relationship > to other structures - but maths is unchangeable. Math, the Platonic Historical context is unchangeable, yes, but perhaps we can cut ourselves loose from our histories and become something ... other? > realm, can be only discovered, not changed. So if you try to make an I wonder if we need to beat that idea into people's head: discovery, not change. > identical copy of me, you can't do it. You can produce new nodes on Neither can you. Not completely, that is. :) > my tree of life by exposing me to new stimuli - to say it timelessly, > there may be correlations between your actions and the shape of my > future but you can't copy the whole thing. A million brains running I am with you, but ... > exactly the same thought, down to the quantum level or below, is only > one brain. A million brains that are similar enough to produce the What? A million brains doing the same thing is really the same thing? I do not see how that is true. Suppose we in fact tried that, and we had a million brains that were in fact quantumly similiar in most of the aspects that matter. Would not their relations and contexts be different, wouldn't we have a floating brain field consuming tons of resources and so on? > same macroscopic-level thoughts, words and actions but differing at > the quantum scale may represent true copies but personally I don't > care about them - they do not differ in the higher-order correlations > I mentioned above as necessary for consciousness. Why bother running > them if they don't materially change the shape of all my thoughts? I > might object to such copies being tortured, since they would increase > the measure of pain in the me-tree. Timelessly said, the preference Are you sure you would object? What is this obsession with "me"ism? > inherent in my structure (hopefully) correlates with a small measure > of quantum-level painful states and with a large number of > interesting, or pleasant macrostates (i.e. groups of microstates > corresponding to a single thought). What? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 03:39:12 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:39:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] first step as principal investigator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <62c14240803102039i18193284t116d6524aa4df35c@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > >Would you comment on why you changed from specifically "woman [...] in > the > >sciences" to non-gendered "young researchers" ? > > I didn't write the latter part. I suggest to read Sabine's full post, > to which I gave a link, and ask her questions about her writing at her > blog. > > You can ask me questions about what I wrote, as well. > Sorry, the was in my field of view, but didn't trigger any meaning... nevermind then. :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 11 03:43:30 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:43:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Vissudimagga re: "suffering exists but none who suffers" Message-ID: <8CA51413539CD34-10FC-2EBE@webmail-ne14.sysops.aol.com> Gary: "I believe the author was as is typical in Buddhist and Hindu teachings speaking about the illusion of ego or self. When enlightenment is achieved the ego of self is gone for a time and one perceives the world one's being as having merged with all that is. This altered state is accompanied by a state of euphoria and great emotional and spiritual intensity." My reply: Vissudimagga is written by Boddhagosa, a Theravada Buddhist scholar born centuries after the death of the historical Buddha. Buddhists' teaching differs from Hindu beliefs on soul, reincarnation and gods. In Buddhism, the mind is the sixth sense working in conjunction with the other five senses without dependence on a separate or permanent self, soul or god. In Buddhism without beliefs, Zen teaches a way to free the mind of thoughts/beliefs. Enlightenment is not a state of euphoria or great emotional intensity. It is plain awareness/consciousness, nothing profound. Gary: "Although the state does not last long. It is deeply transformational due to it's intensity. And obviously highly addictive given that followers will study and devote years of their life in an attempt to attain this state if only for brief periods." My reply: Those who claim enlightenment, know not and those who are enlightened knows suffering exist temporarily. In Zen, no one is born and no one dies in correlation with the law of nature that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed from solid to liquid to gas. Gary: "I believe that this state of consciousness is the true goal of true mystics from faiths and religions. Of course the vast majority of any faith are followers and although they may be awe of the true mystics are not usually able to attain these states themselves. A true teachers goal is to help disciples attain this state." My reply: Consciousness/awareness is not a belief as some so called mystics who believed in metaphysical forces without evidence. How can you prove you are conscious? How can the sense of self evolved from among the electrochemical interactions in the brain? Its the same process that evolved eons ago as proven by evolution and physics. Gary: "The objective reality of such states can not be proven scientifically." Indeed alternate explanations such as the release of internal pleasure chemicals in the brain is a tempting and somewhat plausible hypothesis but why does this state serve to convince those who experience it that it is this altered state which is reality and it is our normal everyday state that is the illusion? And why does this state inspire those who achieve it to start religions, form cults, and help others to achieve that same state." My reply: Altered state of consciousness as the name implies is a psychological response to stress. Gullible minds are a rich medium for memes/beliefs without a concrete evidence due to fear of the unknown. Religious cults are formed in the belief that there is safety in numbers, I guess. Gary: "Such altruism may be viewed as a crucial ingredient for a hero. After all Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammad, probably serve as role models and heroes for more human beings on this planet than all others combined. And I know this sorely galls many folks here who blame religion for many of histories wars, atrocities and probably rightly so." I agree. There is a saying in Buddhism that " if you see the Buddha, kill him." Meaning don't cling to your illusions, beliefs and thoughts. Gary: "But heroes lives serve as examples for the rest of us to live by. Can we blame a hero though for those who use their names and the stories of their lives to control others and manipulate their teachings for their own gain?" My reply: I don't blame thoughts or mistakes in thinking. We are all thoughts interconnected in a short time span. Terry ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat End of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 19 ******************************************** Standard VersionTerms of ServicePrivacy PolicyTrademarks ? 2008 AOL LLC. All Rights Reserved From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 11 09:47:15 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 02:47:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> In an intriguing essay, Rafal discusses "identical copies" and whether their runtime, calculated separately and summed, is meaningful or important. One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important, is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many others---should instrucs us about what actions to take and what decisions to make. I don't have time to digress on modal reality, and the way that I think that it's subsumed by the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. In short, MWI so far as I can tell, provides a complete model for modal reality. The Wikipedia articles on "modal reality" and "ultimate ensemble" are very clear, and good. If someone wants to start a new thread about that, fine. I could stand to be corrected here. > This form of self-correlation may be the necessary (although perhaps not > sufficient) condition for conscious experience. So you could say that > consciousness is a property of self-correlated structures, existing > timelessly as parts of the larger branching chains of world-states. I presume that these are the SAS (self aware structures) described by Tegmark. > Do I make myself clear? Can you imagine a tree-like, branching, > mathematical shape, a monumentally huge graph, with every single > thought and feeling you had, have, and will have in all possible > worlds, represented simultaneously in its nodes? Your essay is very clear. > Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only > you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of your > consciousness? Of course, as you know, this is at extreme variance with our normal usages of the words "you" and the time/places of your consciousness. For example, either under modal realism or the MWI, something extremely similar to me (under the conventional meanings of words) actually received a phone call a few minutes ago, and so is not typing this. It's a "possible world" under modal realism, and equally real under the MWI. Below, you use "versions of you" to talk about, for example, those Rafals who get to live forever, or those Lees who got a phone call. (Now I am actually very sympathetic to a definition of "you" that states that "you are a fuzzy sphere in the space of all algorithms", and that (a version of) you traces out some particular path over time. This moving point may leave the sphere so far behind that "you become someone else".) Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and what I can expect the different outcomes to be like. But advice I find here does a Lee in another branch who's in a different predicament no good. He may be too busy or too wounded to care. Now on your usage of words, he and I and all the Lee's who were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow for overlap at their extreme edges. > Since every thought and desire correlates with the shape of the > tree throughout its extent, I see my thoughts, desires and actions > as a form of sculpture. It is as if time existed, and my decision to > write this post changed the shape of some branches of my tree > of life.... Yes. We both know enough not to be distracted by the apparent but false connection to Free Will vs. Determinism. > Causation is nothing but correlation...if you know what I mean. Actually, I don't. Many years ago John Clark made an excellent case that for A to cause B reduces simply to "A always comes before B". Maybe the current branch of the JC tree is doubtful of that now, but after lengthy debate he convinced me. Also, the study of "Causality" conducted by Judea Pearl in the book of that name makes me highly suspicious of trying to reduce causality to correlation. > In case some readers might see this as just my private ravings, > this notion of causality is actually accepted by some notable > philosophers, e.g. it is expounded upon by Daniel Dennett in > "Freedom Evolves". Dennett has a four page section on causality in "Freedom Evolves", but he explicitly rejects any simple formulations saying "we should mistrust any informal arguments that masquerade as "proofs" validating or debunking particular causal doctrines." The section is basically a beginner's guide to how Dennett intends to use the term, and is quite all right. As you know, what is very important about "Freedom Evolves" is his *evitability*. > Thus I am the many-dimensional sculptor of my past, present > and future. I do care about the size of my tree of life, which > translated into time-speak means, I want to live longer. You mean "this version of you wants to live longer", right? > If some of my versions in at least some possible universes > escape aging and live for thousands of years, it is like saying > that my tree of life is tall. And those who would resolutely > refuse life extension? Their trees are stunted, mere bushes, > since in every possible universe they choose death. Well yes, but I doubt that they choose death in *every* possible universe. Without recourse to "possible worlds", one may simply point out that at 75 years of age one of them happened to make a friend who was the world's most persuasive cryonics advocate. > But what about all those copies and "runtime"? Yes! > As I wrote above, each one of us corresponds to only one shape. > Individual shapes my partially overlap, sharing some parts, and > there are gazillions of physically distinguishable states in each "I", > like very close relatives populating the googolplexes of > universe-states, but there are no "copies". Just like there is only > one square, there is only one of me-trees. Of course there can be no copy of You the big tree, just as there can be no copy of a fuzzy sphere in the space of all configurations. By "copies" in these and similar threads, we always meant copies of a version-of-you in a tiny branch of the overall multiverse. * Action Item: Should I dare teleport? Analysis: the remote version-of-you is well within the fuzzy sphere (I haven't figured out how to translate this answer into Rafal's language) > So if you try to make an identical copy of me [the Tree], you > can't do it. You can produce new nodes on my tree of life by > exposing me to new stimuli - to say it timelessly, there may be > correlations between your actions and the shape of my future... But first, by a "copy of you" in all these threads, we mean the sort of creature that comes out of a teleporter booth, or a fork that results in two branches where there had been just one. No one ever meant anything different. Moreover, the "copies" need not be absolutely identical (more about that later). > A million brains running exactly the same thought, down to the > quantum level or below, is only one brain. A million brains that > are similar enough to produce the same macroscopic-level > thoughts, words and actions but differing at the quantum scale > may represent true copies but personally I don't care about them > - they do not differ in the higher-order correlations I mentioned > above as necessary for consciousness. Bryan exploded at this point: "What? A million brains doing the [exact] same thing is really the same thing? I do not see how that can be true." Rafal, who never mentions measure, just makes the logical point that the "Tree of Rafal" has no new distinct branches when copies are made that are so exact that they do not make different thoughts. * Action Item: Do I benefit from the replication of copies that become a tiny bit different almost at once, and then have different thoughts as they explore many different planets? Should I pay for that? Analysis: Either on Rafal's analysis or mine, the answer is "YES". He'd say your tree of life is enriched, I'd say you get more runtime. Left unanalyzed for now: *Action Item: Do I benefit by the multiplication over space of absolutely quantum- mechanically equivalent copies. Analysis: later. SO I think we agree that it's better for one to get more runtime---or as you would say---have more and higher branches in the Tree-of-You. I'd favor leaving the "absolutely quantum-mechanically equivalent copies case" until after we're seeing a little more eye-to-eye on the above (or making sure we do) Even though your subject line directly implied runtime to be taken merely as summed over absolutely identical copies! Grrr. :-) Lee > Why bother running them if they don't materially change the shape > of all my thoughts? I might object to such copies being tortured, > since they would increase the measure of pain in the me-tree. > Timelessly said, the preference inherent in my structure (hopefully) > correlates with a small measure of quantum-level painful states and > with a large number of interesting, or pleasant macrostates (i.e. > groups of microstates corresponding to a single thought). From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 12:00:05 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:00:05 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310204502.024e8960@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310204502.024e8960@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803110500g79371cfcj58d07f70834c4e19@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I see that the Vatican's list does not include some candidates that > leapt to my mind; for example, Running a Global Institution > Supporting the Buggering of Little Boys in its Care, or Inculcating > into the Minds of the Defenceless Arrant and Frightening Bullshit > About Just about Everything. :-DDD Stefano Vaj From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 12:01:19 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:01:19 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' References: Message-ID: <006701c8836f$a72c5c90$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Amara> The seven social sins are: > 1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control > 2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research > 3. Drug abuse > 4. Polluting the environment > 5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor > 6. Excessive wealth > 7. Creating poverty I'll agree to this list when they can provide me with footage of this god dude himself writing it with a blue Bic pen on recycled paper. From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 11 13:34:25 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:34:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] (no subject) Message-ID: <8CA5193C1F948A2-A6C-77C@webmail-ne17.sysops.aol.com> Amara: "Good news, extropes! Your social preferences hit two of the top three on the Vatican's list of seven 'social sins'! From http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/10/vatican-comes-up-wit.html In the sixth century, Pope Gregory handed down a list of "seven cardinal vices." Now the Vatican has issued an additional seven "social sins." You offend God not only by stealing, taking the Lord's name in vain or coveting your neighbor's wife, but also by wrecking the environment, carrying out morally debatable experiments that manipulate DNA or harm embryos," said [Bishop Gianfranco] Girotti, who is responsible for the body that oversees confessions. The seven social sins are: 1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control 2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research 3. Drug abuse 4. Polluting the environment 5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor 6. Excessive wealth 7. Creating poverty -- The Pope is just updating the "original sins' into "Social sins" to get in step {baby steps} with science and technology.imo The Vatican does not want to be seen as static or behind the times by the dwindling members or followers in more advanced countries in Europe. Why do you think the Vatican is isolated from the rest of Italy? The Pope has to protect it's image of infallibility. Terry From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 14:58:52 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:58:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200803110958.52358.kanzure@gmail.com> On Monday 10 March 2008, Amara Graps wrote: > ? ? ?The seven social sins are: > > ? ? ?1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control There is a blurring line between mental birth control (deciding not to) and pharmoceutical birth control. When are they going to start deciding that it is unethical to even think about _not_ replicating? Cancer. > ? ? ?2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research I guess they are uninterested in how some of us are able to reconcile morality with stem cell research? Shouldn't they be interested in adopting as much as possible into their world-view? Guess not. > ? ? ?3. Drug abuse That's a hard line to find. It may be more productive to set up social services to help out people who may not be using drugs effectively. For example, in the case of the recent emails re: nootropics, I bet we are going to have to train fellows how to properly use their brains and any enhanced abilities, rather than expecting them to pop a pill and magically know. > ? ? ?4. Polluting the environment Heh, some of us think religion is polluting the environment. Now what? (signal-to-noise) > ? ? ?5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor Moral wealth, or monetary wealth? > ? ? ?6. Excessive wealth Is this asking for a limit on intelligence? > ? ? ?7. Creating poverty That's a tough one. Any takers? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 11 14:47:14 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 07:47:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080310204502.024e8960@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803111514.m2BFDssZ017405@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Damien Broderick > Subject: Re: [ExI] Vatican's list of seven 'social sins' > > At 05:58 PM 3/10/2008 -0600, Amara wrote: > > >Good news, extropes! Your social preferences hit two of the > >top three on the Vatican's list of seven 'social sins'! > > I see that the Vatican's list does not include some > candidates that leapt to my mind; for example, Running a > Global Institution Supporting the Buggering of Little Boys in > its Care, or Inculcating into the Minds of the Defenceless > Arrant and Frightening Bullshit About Just about Everything. > > And yet, oddly enough, the Pope's seventh sin, Creating > Poverty, is exactly what his own organization insists on > committing with such mad claptrap as making their first sin > "Bioethical" Violations Such as Birth Control. > > Damien Broderick Damien reading your passage above reminds me why you are able to make a good living selling your words, whereas I hafta slave away in a mindless 9 to 5. Thanks, I couldn'ta said it better. When I saw the popes list of seven social sins, I wanted to write to Mr. Ratzinger and tell him "Do not worry, your group is on my list of social sins as well." But I like much better the way you and Amara said it. spike From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 15:22:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:22:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > In an intriguing essay, Rafal discusses "identical copies" and > whether their runtime, calculated separately and summed, is > meaningful or important. > > One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important, > is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many > others---should instrucs us about what actions to take and what > decisions to make. > > I don't have time to digress on modal reality, and the way that I > think that it's subsumed by the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum > mechanics. In short, MWI so far as I can tell, provides a complete > model for modal reality. The Wikipedia articles on "modal reality" > and "ultimate ensemble" are very clear, and good. If someone wants to > start a new thread about that, fine. I could stand to be corrected > here. I would not have expected an implicit connection between MWI and modal realism per Rafal's message. However, I took this opportunity to go look at the Wikipedia article and I see what you mean: > Modal realism is the view, notably propounded by David Lewis, that > possible worlds are as real as the actual world. It is based on the > following notions: that possible worlds exist; possible worlds are not > different in kind to the actual world; possible worlds are irreducible > entities; the term "actual" in "actual world" is indexical. Hrm. I really would like to add some Leibniz in on this. How could possibilities be as real as actualities? Let me reform my question. Is he saying that possibilities exist in the sense of mental constructs, such that one's lack of knowledge of the world essentially makes the world both the 'real' and the 'possible' as you recursively explore it and make your own representation? A vague, fuzzy set of what the world may or may not be, allowing subjective agents to explore it without messing up too much. Or is he saying that, metaphysically, the possibilities are as real as anything else? Charles S. Peirce would have something to say about this use of the word 'possibility' since, naturally, it is more tied to the human mind, and he really, really disliked anybody saying something was 'possible' when they did not have the true source code to the universe to figure out the likelihood of something occuring or whether or not something was truly valid given whatever underlying laws of the universe there exist (whether a cellular automata rule or not, just so I can get in my mention of Wolfram and von Neumann etc.). Is Lewis saying that possibilities exist (in the sense that a mental agent can rationalize that something might be 'possible' given his limited understanding of the greater world), or that if we allow such 'possibilities' we automatically must acknowledge their full and total existence? I like to use Leibniz's optimism and his definitions from time to time: 1) real - necessarily existent 2) impossible - necessarily nonexistent 3) possible - unnecessarily nonexistent And a few others. I realize now that I cannot recall a link that explains this terminology, but I do think it is still useful here since it ties possibilities/reality/actuality back to terms re: necessity and coherency. > > This form of self-correlation may be the necessary (although > > perhaps not sufficient) condition for conscious experience. So you > > could say that consciousness is a property of self-correlated > > structures, existing timelessly as parts of the larger branching > > chains of world-states. > > I presume that these are the SAS (self aware structures) described by > Tegmark. Why would SASes be needed? If anything it should be more like an observer bias to calculate out due to the anthropic principles and so on, since all subjective agents would present a slightly different bias in consciousness or awareness; in more hard scifi terms, I'd argue that consciousness may not even exist, despite my experience and my mind, it's not a magical sauce. :) > > Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only > > you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of your > > consciousness? > > Of course, as you know, this is at extreme variance with our > normal usages of the words "you" and the time/places of your > consciousness. For example, either under modal realism or the > MWI, something extremely similar to me (under the conventional > meanings of words) actually received a phone call a few minutes > ago, and so is not typing this. It's a "possible world" under > modal realism, and equally real under the MWI. Below, you use > "versions of you" to talk about, for example, those Rafals who > get to live forever, or those Lees who got a phone call. I was not expecting this diversion. Given the distinctions I made above, if we discuss them some more, and it turns out that Lewis and his modal realism is more about subjective agents and their GLUTs, rathe than a metaphysical ensemble, then I think that you would have to drop your MWI tie-ins. On my first passing of Rafal's email, it seemed to me that the ensemble that he was describing was merely explanatory, and not necessitating MWI or even itself -- merely as a way to describe data structs in the world that we experience on a more abstract level. > (Now I am actually very sympathetic to a definition of "you" that > states that "you are a fuzzy sphere in the space of all algorithms", > and that (a version of) you traces out some particular path over > time. This moving point may leave the sphere so far behind that > "you become someone else".) That's interesting; perhaps we are tracers running through paths in design space, computing the shortest and longest paths all in the name of computer science, graph theory, topology, etc. > Now on your usage of words, he and I and all the Lee's who > were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part > of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want > to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of > Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow > for overlap at their extreme edges. Are not all things, somehow related, if not physically then at least in our minds? Somebody might reply to this saying "try to find a correlation between X and Y" and that would only serve to show that somebody has in fact made that correlation, and the more that people read that email, the more 'real' it is becoming (I do not mean to say that popular approval increases the realness, merely that the content is diffused over the surface area of the local reality, so it is becoming more than the 'nothing' that the original emailer was hoping to select for). > > Since every thought and desire correlates with the shape of the > > tree throughout its extent, I see my thoughts, desires and actions > > as a form of sculpture. It is as if time existed, and my decision > > to write this post changed the shape of some branches of my tree of > > life.... > > Yes. We both know enough not to be distracted by the apparent > but false connection to Free Will vs. Determinism. Re: Free Will vs. Determinism. They do not seem to be at ends with each other. The best solution is to assume you have free will. Maybe we can start another thread for this, if we haven't come to this conclusion before. > > A million brains running exactly the same thought, down to the > > quantum level or below, is only one brain. A million brains that > > are similar enough to produce the same macroscopic-level > > thoughts, words and actions but differing at the quantum scale > > may represent true copies but personally I don't care about them > > - they do not differ in the higher-order correlations I mentioned > > above as necessary for consciousness. > > Bryan exploded at this point: "What? A million brains doing the Indeed. :) > [exact] same thing is really the same thing? I do not see how > that can be true." Rafal, who never mentions measure, just > makes the logical point that the "Tree of Rafal" has no new > distinct branches when copies are made that are so exact > that they do not make different thoughts. I suppose. But he also mentions that this is impossible when he says "you can't copy me," so I guess he resolved that scenario on his own. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 16:59:39 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:59:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <62c14240803091323m35c22992h442e7c910fdcb50c@mail.gmail.com> References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <62c14240803091323m35c22992h442e7c910fdcb50c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803110959pfb12714w42880df8e32edc3d@mail.gmail.com> Damien wrote: > I wonder what about this thread evokes this response from those who have > done it to death, yet compels those same participants to leap into the fray > for another round. > >>> > Do we have any psychologists in the house?? lol Oh, and Damien, when do we get started on a "gun control" thread? We should really contact Mike Lorrey and Joe Dees first... ; ) John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 17:17:41 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:17:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] exposing microbes to space increases virulence Message-ID: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com> I found this article about certain microbes greatly increasing in virulence when living/reproducing in space to be very disturbing. I hope researchers can get a handle on it. John http://www.biodesign.asu.edu/news/1501 Microscopic 'astronauts' to go back in orbit When space shuttle Endeavor blasted off at 2:28 a.m. EST on March 11 to make a blazing torch against the backdrop of night, some tiny 'astronauts' piggybacked onboard an experimental payload from Arizona State University's Biodesign Institute. The new experiment, called "Microbial Drug Resistance Virulence" is part of the STS-123 space shuttle Endeavor mission. It will continue the research studies of Cheryl Nickerson, PhD, project leader and scientist in the institute's Center for Infectious Diseases and Vaccinology. Nickerson has been at the forefront on studying the risks of germs associated with spaceflight to the health and well being of the crew. "Wherever people go, germs will follow," said Nickerson, who is also an associate professor at ASU's School of Life Sciences. Last fall, she completed a multi-institutional study that showed for the first time that microbes could be affected by spaceflight, making them more infectious pathogens. The results were from a payload flown onboard space shuttle Atlantis in 2006. Spaceflight not only altered bacterial gene expression but also increased the ability of these organisms to cause disease, or virulence, and did so in novel ways. Compared to identical bacteria that remained on earth, the space-traveling *Salmonella*, a leading cause of food-borne illness, had changed expression of 167 genes. In addition, bacteria that were flown in space were almost three times as likely to cause disease when compared with control bacteria grown on the ground. Now, her research team, which includes James Wilson, PhD, Laura Quick, Richard Davis, Emily Richter, Aurelie Crabbe and Shameema Sarker, will have an extraordinarily rare opportunity to fly a repeat experiment of their NASA payload to confirm their earlier results. "We are very fortunate to get a follow up flight opportunity, because in spaceflight, you only get one shot for everything to go just right," said Nickerson. "We saw unique bacterial responses in flight and these responses are giving us new information about how *Salmonella* causes disease. NASA is giving us the opportunity to independently replicate the virulence studies of *Salmonella typhimurium* from our last shuttle experiment and to do a follow-up experiment to test our hypothesis about new ways this bacteria causes disease in this unique environment." In the new experimental wrinkle, the team will test a hypothesis that may lead to decreasing or preventing the risk for infectious diseases to astronauts. The experiment will determine if the modulation of different ion (mineral) concentrations may be used as a novel way to counteract or block the spaceflight-associated increase in the disease-causing potential that was seen in *Salmonella*. In addition, the project will support three other independent investigators to determine the effect of spaceflight on the gene expression and virulence potential of other model microorganisms, including: Dave Niesel, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, *Streptococcus pneumoniae*; Mike McGinnis, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*; and Barry Pyle, Montana State University, *Pseudomonas aeruginosa*. These microorganisms were chosen because they are well studied organisms that have been, or have the potential to be, isolated from the space shuttle, Mir space station, International Space Station, or its crew, or have been shown to exhibit altered virulence in response to spaceflight. These organisms are all important human pathogens that cause a significant amount of human morbidity and mortality on Earth as well. "We now have a wide variety of supportive evidence that the unique low fluid shear culture environment the bacteria encounter in space is relevant to what pathogens encounter in our body, including during Salmonella infection in the gut, and there may be a common regulatory theme governing the microbial responses," said Nickerson. "But to prove that, we need to fly these common bugs together with the same hardware on the same flight so that everyone is tested under the same conditions. The investigators believe that information gained from these studies will prove beneficial in assessing microbiological risks and options for reducing those risks during crew missions. When taken together, these studies will ultimately provide significant insights into the molecular basis of microbial virulence. Once specific molecular targets are identified, there is the potential for vaccine development and other novel strategies for prevention and treatment of disease caused by these microbes both on the ground and during spaceflight. "We are learning new things about how Salmonella is causing disease," said Nickerson. "There is compelling evidence that the unique environment of spaceflight provides important insight into a variety of fundamental human health issues with tremendous potential for the commercial development of novel enabling technologies to enhance human health here on Earth, said Nickerson. The research studies are supported by several grants from NASA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 11 17:36:13 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:36:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803110959pfb12714w42880df8e32edc3d@mail.gmail.com > References: <059101c88009$0ca610d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00aa01c8804d$cbdb1970$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <580930c20803070536j48d2822eye8b6b79e90a91759@mail.gmail.com> <002201c88061$739bea00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <022e01c8808e$05d33be0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <62c14240803091323m35c22992h442e7c910fdcb50c@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670803110959pfb12714w42880df8e32edc3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080311123508.02619608@satx.rr.com> At 09:59 AM 3/11/2008 -0700, JG wrote: >Damien wrote: > >I wonder what about this thread evokes this response from those who >have done it to death, yet compels those same participants to leap >into the fray for another round. I didn't write that. From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 11 18:31:26 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:31:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Technical Uploading Difficulties In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803110959pfb12714w42880df8e32edc3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803111858.m2BIw5Eu025790@andromeda.ziaspace.com> ... Oh, and Damien, when do we get started on a "gun control" thread? We should really contact Mike Lorrey and Joe Dees first... ; ) John Ahhhh, let's not do that, shall we? spike From scerir at libero.it Tue Mar 11 18:49:16 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:49:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> Plans are being made for the installation of an information storage bank on the moon, experts said at a science meeting Strasbourg, France. The so-called "Doomsday ark" would provide the tools for the reconstruction of the human race in case civilization is ever destroyed, The Sunday London Times reported. The ark's basic version, which would be buried close to the moon's surface, would include hard discs containing DNA information and instructions for growing crops and metal making, the report said. The underground vault reportedly would transmit data to strongly guarded receivers on Earth. "Eventually, it will be necessary to have a kind of Noah's ark there, a diversity of species from the biosphere," scientist Bernard Foing said. The first ark, which would have a 30-year lifespan, is expected to be installed on the moon by 2020 at the latest. The completed archive should be ready by 2035, scientists said. For more, see the following link http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3511818.ece From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 11 20:09:34 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:09:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reconceptualizing the hero myth Message-ID: <8CA51CAF5DC7F37-13F8-161C@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> Gary:"I'd like to quote Zindell: > 'Without end,' Hanuman said. The pain of self-overcoming is just the > beginning. Then, for our kind, if we're strong enough, if our souls > are great and deep ? then comes the real pain. What's real pain, you > ask? The power to choose what we will. Having to choose. This terrible > freedom. These infinite possibilities. The taste for the infinite > spoiled by the possibility of evolutionary failure. Real pain is > knowing that you're going to die, all the while knowing that you don't > have to die.' 'But, Hanu, everything dies,' Danlo said softly. He > turned to face the scarred, old shih tree, and he pressed his forehead > against it. When he looked up, he felt the zig-zag mark where the > tree's icy bark had cut into his skin. Hanuman shook his head and > continued, 'But why die at all, Danlo? Mightn't there be a new phase > of evolution? A new kind of being? Can't you understand? I'm trying to > delineate an emergent quality of the brain. New synapses. New > connections. A constellation of qualities and abilities, of new levels > of existence. Consciousness heightened and exalted in itself, > purified. This pure consciousness that we really are. That we struggle > to be. For our kind, there's always the burning to be more. The > eternal longing. And this is why true human beings feel more pain. > Because we are more, but it's never quite enough ? never. And we are > aware of this neverness inside our souls. And aware of being aware. > There is a feedback. Can you understand what this is like? Pain is > magnified, infinitely. Each moment of time. Reality becomes almost too > real. It blazes. All the universe afire with the possibilities of > light, and madness, too. Real pain is the burning that never stops, > the frenzy, the lightning.' " _____________ Hi, thanks for the above quote which expressed discontent of the human condition prone to illness, poverty and death. The factors that contribute to mental health are within reach of everyone yet sensient beings are numberless and a Boddhisattva vows to save them all from suffering delusions by learning and doing what is unattainable. Hanuman said that "real pain is knowing that you're going to die and all the while knowing that you don't have to die." Perhaps a Boddhisattva is a reconceptualized hero? Terry From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 20:30:43 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:30:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) In-Reply-To: <004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com> <004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> Message-ID: <200803111530.43106.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 11 March 2008, scerir wrote: > Plans are being made for the installation > of an information storage bank on the moon, For the installation, not for the design of it, this is interesting. The design should be simple, I suppose: you need the hard drives, an electrical power supply, a few microprocessors for running your programs, and then a way to maintain the physical archive and sort through the inventory, unless it's all digital (which I doubt). What sort of physical capabilities should a first version 'ark' have? Obviously we do not have self-replication down, so things are going to start off fuzzy. > experts said at a science meeting Strasbourg, France. > The so-called "Doomsday ark" would provide the tools > for the reconstruction of the human race in case > civilization is ever destroyed, The Sunday London Times > reported. Compressing civilization down into a bootstrap form also has been discussed by Kevin Kelly, Dave Gingery, and various others who have a clue as to what's going on. But compressing all of this information down presents an interesting challenge, and I am not sure if Wikipedia is sufficient to help diffuse information on the design of civilization. > The ark's basic version, which would be buried close > to the moon's surface, would include hard discs > containing DNA information and instructions for > growing crops and metal making, the report said. Upload Wikipedia please. The other day I was figuring that if I do figure out a way to get into orbit for cheap, and if I can manufacture transistors in orbit and paramagnetic materials, then I would very much like to start offering as much storage space as possible to anybody who wants it: fabrication costs will only be the cost of figuring out how to make it work with the materials in the sky. (more on this later?) > The underground vault reportedly would transmit data > to strongly guarded receivers on Earth. I don't like that: why not transmit for all to hear a message of hope? > "Eventually, it will be necessary to have a kind of > Noah's ark there, a diversity of species from the biosphere," Noah's ark? How's that for ego? :) -Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 20:32:39 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:32:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Reconceptualizing the hero myth In-Reply-To: <8CA51CAF5DC7F37-13F8-161C@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA51CAF5DC7F37-13F8-161C@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803111532.39785.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 11 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > The factors that contribute to mental health are within reach of > everyone yet sensient beings are numberless and a Boddhisattva vows > to save them all from suffering delusions by learning and doing what > is unattainable. ?Hanuman said that "real pain is knowing that you're > going to die and all the while knowing that you don't have to die." > > Perhaps a Boddhisattva is a reconceptualized hero? Zindell was influenced by Vedanta philosophy; with my little knowledge of Buddhism and Zen, perhaps you could tell me how far off the Boddhisattva is from Vedanta? :) - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 11 22:47:29 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:47:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimentional Sculpture Message-ID: <8CA51E104EA1AB3-13F8-2023@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> Bryan: "Are not all things, somehow related, if not physically then at least in our minds? Somebody might reply to this saying "try to find a correlation between X and Y" and that would only serve to show that somebody has in fact made that correlation, and the more that people read that email, the more 'real' it is becoming (I do not mean to say that popular approval increases the realness, merely that the content is diffused over the surface area of the local reality, so it is becoming more than the 'nothing' that the original emailer was hoping to select for)." __________ Hi, Bryan, first let me apologize for mistakenly typing Gary in place of your name from my last post. Regarding your question about the interrelatedness of things, have you heard about "mind to mind transmission?' Is there a scientific basis for that? Thoughts are diffused locally but globally? I think not. Terry From ablainey at aol.com Tue Mar 11 23:15:37 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:15:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) In-Reply-To: <004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com> <004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> Message-ID: <8CA51E4F2FB6746-7D8-22BE@webmail-da19.sysops.aol.com> Interesting idea. Reminds me of one of the first CD-rom drives I bought. back in the days before plug'n'play atapi drive recognition. The drivers for it came on CD. -----Original Message----- From: scerir To: ExI chat list Sent: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:49 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) Plans are being made for the installation of an information storage bank on the moon, experts said at a science meeting Strasbourg, France. The so-called "Doomsday ark" would provide the tools for the reconstruction of the human race in case civilization is ever destroyed, The Sunday London Times reported. The ark's basic version, which would be buried close to the moon's surface, would include hard discs containing DNA information and instructions for growing crops and metal making, the report said. The underground vault reportedly would transmit data to strongly guarded receivers on Earth. "Eventually, it will be necessary to have a kind of Noah's ark there, a diversity of species from the biosphere," scientist Bernard Foing said. The first ark, which would have a 30-year lifespan, is expected to be installed on the moon by 2020 at the latest. The completed archive should be ready by 2035, scientists said. For more, see the following link http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3511818.ece _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 11 23:55:14 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:55:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimentional Sculpture In-Reply-To: <8CA51E104EA1AB3-13F8-2023@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA51E104EA1AB3-13F8-2023@FWM-D20.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803111855.14407.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 11 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Hi, Bryan, first let me apologize for mistakenly typing Gary in place > of your name from my last post. Regarding your question about the > interrelatedness of things, have you heard about "mind to mind > transmission?' Not before your email, no. > Is there a scientific basis for that? Thoughts are diffused locally > but globally? I think not. It is my understanding that Dharmic transmission is more about a Zen master giving a nod of approval more than anything else, a social thing. So I think we might be talking about two different things. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 03:52:26 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:52:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803112052k2eb3aa7bh918713ac16b34d64@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 5:47 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I don't have time to digress on modal reality, and the way that I think > that > it's subsumed by the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. > In short, MWI so far as I can tell, provides a complete model for modal > reality. ### As usual, we agree more than might be expected from the initial statements. Here I would however say that modal realism subsumes MWI. Tegmark posits four levels of parallelism, and I would see modal realism as relevant to the fourth level - the ensemble of all mathematical structures, while MWI pertains to the current mathematical description of our direct neighborhood (60 billion light years diameter). ------------------------------------------- > > > Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only > > you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of your > > consciousness? > > Of course, as you know, this is at extreme variance with our > normal usages of the words "you" and the time/places of your > consciousness. For example, either under modal realism or the > MWI, something extremely similar to me (under the conventional > meanings of words) actually received a phone call a few minutes > ago, and so is not typing this. It's a "possible world" under > modal realism, and equally real under the MWI. Below, you use > "versions of you" to talk about, for example, those Rafals who > get to live forever, or those Lees who got a phone call. ### Yes, this is indeed a bit different way of looking at oneself - trying to do away with time as something that passes, and instead seeing it as a part of yourself, one of the dimensions that differentiate various parts of me from each other. The "Rafals who get to live forever" are more like thin lines connecting a larger mass at the base of the tree (corresponding to the majority of my versions that die before or during the singularity) to the wider branching parts corresponding to the versions of me successfully surviving the singularity, getting uploaded and having the chance to do all things that a being can do and still be recognizably similar to the me-now-here. -------------------------------------------------------- > (Now I am actually very sympathetic to a definition of "you" that > states that "you are a fuzzy sphere in the space of all algorithms", > and that (a version of) you traces out some particular path over > time. This moving point may leave the sphere so far behind that > "you become someone else".) ### Yes! ----------------------------------- > > Now on your usage of words, he and I and all the Lee's who > were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part > of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want > to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of > Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow > for overlap at their extreme edges. ### Well, yes, I think that some overlap exists. Some of the Rafal-parts and the Lee-parts that make it through the singularity may one day live in the same piece of computronium, perhaps sharing some basic resources, perhaps even buying and selling memories and various utilities - but in general my definition of self does not permit strong overlap with other minds. BTW, Lee - are you *that* old? :) ----------------------------------------------- > > > Causation is nothing but correlation...if you know what I mean. > > Actually, I don't. Many years ago John Clark made an excellent > case that for A to cause B reduces simply to "A always comes > before B". Maybe the current branch of the JC tree is doubtful > of that now, but after lengthy debate he convinced me. > > Also, the study of "Causality" conducted by Judea Pearl in the > book of that name makes me highly suspicious of trying to > reduce causality to correlation. > ### This is indeed a very thorny issue. I agree that in some sense, describing causality is more complex than simply pointing to a correlation. One could even claim that causation can act backwards in time - when you predict a supernova explosion, and act accordingly, it is like a message from the future having an impact on the present. But in the present context I still think it is fair to say that causation is a form of correlation. My thoughts correlate with my actions, i.e. the omniscient observer would be able to calculate the shape of parts of my tree of life (what is the measure of me that goes to bed in an hour), by observing other parts of me (the neurons in my hypothalamus now). Correlation is the glue that keeps time together. Correlation is the only connection between the world states that comprise me. Correlation is the connection between each moment of my conscious existence. So to say that my thoughts cause my actions, is to say that my present thoughts correlate with my actions. Not all correlation is causation, but all causation is correlation. ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Thus I am the many-dimensional sculptor of my past, present > > and future. I do care about the size of my tree of life, which > > translated into time-speak means, I want to live longer. > > You mean "this version of you wants to live longer", right? ### Well, actually, wanting to live longer (assuming no severe pain) is one of the key characteristics of all parts of me. If a mind with my memories and inclinations is made but it has no built-in desire to live longer (in the sense of identifying with the branches of me that extend as far as possible), then that mind is not a part of me. It is its own little tree of life. ------------------------------------------------------ > > > If some of my versions in at least some possible universes > > escape aging and live for thousands of years, it is like saying > > that my tree of life is tall. And those who would resolutely > > refuse life extension? Their trees are stunted, mere bushes, > > since in every possible universe they choose death. > > Well yes, but I doubt that they choose death in *every* > possible universe. Without recourse to "possible worlds", one > may simply point out that at 75 years of age one of them > happened to make a friend who was the world's most > persuasive cryonics advocate. ### There may be people who would simply refuse to call a survivor a part of their tree of life. They define themselves as mortal, and since the definition is all there is to a mathematical structure, they are mortal. --------------------------------------------------- > > By "copies" in these and similar threads, we always meant copies > of a version-of-you in a tiny branch of the overall multiverse. ### Yeah, here we agree. I agree that "copies" that are not ideally identical are indeed separate branches of me, as long as they don't diverge beyond recognition. ------------------------------------------- > * Action Item: Do I benefit from the replication of copies that > become a tiny bit different almost at once, and > then have different thoughts as they explore > many different planets? Should I pay for that? > Analysis: Either on Rafal's analysis or mine, > the answer is "YES". He'd say your tree of life > is enriched, I'd say you get more runtime. ### Yes, we agree here. ------------------------ > Left unanalyzed for now: *Action Item: Do I benefit by the > multiplication over space of absolutely quantum- > mechanically equivalent copies. Analysis: later. > > SO I think we agree that it's better for one to get more > runtime---or as you would say---have more and higher > branches in the Tree-of-You. I'd favor leaving the > "absolutely quantum-mechanically equivalent copies > case" until after we're seeing a little more eye-to-eye > on the above (or making sure we do) Even though your > subject line directly implied runtime to be taken merely > as summed over absolutely identical copies! Grrr. :-) > ### Yes, this quantum mechanical shtick is tough. But I still don't like the term "runtime" - it seems to imply that running and re-running the same calculations is important. I want new calculations to be performed, so I would spawn teleporter quality copies to explore, preferably with some feedback mechanism to prolong cohesion among copies as they learn new things. I would not rent computronium just to run the same moment over and over again, like Egan's climber. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 04:22:03 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:22:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <200803102219.02669.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803102219.02669.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803112122u13dc176fkd3d842a193bf5a3e@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > Is it? I'll have to investigate this term, 'modal realism'. Is this the > same as monads? ### Nnno, I think it's something different. I never read any Leibniz, so couldn't tell with certainty. -------------------------------- > > Some small structures within events reflect, or correlate with, their > > surroundings.This special form of reflection or map of surroundings, > > is probably a necessary feature of awareness. In addition to > > I do not see this as necessary for the ideas that you go on to discuss. > How can you have a map of your surroundings? The map is not the > territory. ### A map is something that allows prediction about the territory. It may be a bunch of neurons in your parietal cortex. The omniscient observer could guess the shape of the room you are in by examining them. They correlate with the room, so they are a map. The best map is of course the territory itself. I mention this to better describe my idea of self, where consciousness and awareness are important. ---------------------------------------------- Is consciousness necessarily so fundamental? In answer to my own > question, I suppose it would have to be, otherwise you are not really > philosophizing, are you? ### Well, yes, consciousness is very important for the properties of observable worlds, as per the anthropic principle. Only some worlds have the properties that allow consciousness to exist in them, so even if other worlds are real, we won't see them. ------------------------------------------------- > Historical context is unchangeable, yes, but perhaps we can cut > ourselves loose from our histories and become something ... other? ### But if its Other, it's not You! :) If we are mathematical structures, then our own definitions constrain us. As you wrote above ""your effort to remain what you are is what limits you.", and I agree with it. But of course, if your definition of yourself is quite liberal, then by that definition your tree of life may be huge, limited only by your own imagination. ------------------------------------------ > > What? A million brains doing the same thing is really the same thing? I > do not see how that is true. Suppose we in fact tried that, and we had > a million brains that were in fact quantumly similiar in most of the > aspects that matter. Would not their relations and contexts be > different, wouldn't we have a floating brain field consuming tons of > resources and so on? ### Lee gave the explanation so I won't repeat it here, since I agree with him. ------------------------------------- > > > same macroscopic-level thoughts, words and actions but differing at > > the quantum scale may represent true copies but personally I don't > > care about them - they do not differ in the higher-order correlations > > I mentioned above as necessary for consciousness. Why bother running > > them if they don't materially change the shape of all my thoughts? I > > might object to such copies being tortured, since they would increase > > the measure of pain in the me-tree. Timelessly said, the preference > > Are you sure you would object? What is this obsession with "me"ism? ### I have a very strong aversion to suffering, so I really don't want billions of beings very similar to me kept on tenterhooks. But I don't have a strong proclivity to just being there, and I wouldn't spend any money on making billions of copies running the same thoughts, even orgasmically pleasant ones. This is an asymmetry of desires - strong aversion to suffering, a much weaker pull to pleasure. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 04:32:36 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:32:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803112132x4d1c8f76mfbbb83614885c181@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > Is Lewis saying that possibilities exist (in the sense that a mental > agent can rationalize that something might be 'possible' given his > limited understanding of the greater world), or that if we allow > such 'possibilities' we automatically must acknowledge their full and > total existence? ### In my initial post I weaseled out of saying what it means to "be", or what "everything" means, because it hurts my brain to think about it, but since you ask... The way I see it, everything exists. I mean it in the hardcore metaphysical sense - whatever it means to "be", everything you can think of and a lot more, have this property. Even contradictions, even inconsistent logic, even mathematical impossibilities exist, as hard as rocks, except we are not there to touch them. OK, my mind hurts. Need to sleep. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tims at maxtility.com Wed Mar 12 05:16:05 2008 From: tims at maxtility.com (Tim Sullivan) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 01:16:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An Experiment in Collective Intelligence Message-ID: We just launched an experimental web app called YouBorg. We really liked Surowiecki's book, "The Wisdom of Crowds," and thought that it would be interesting to see what would happen if the "collective intelligence" of the Web were harnessed to synthesize text at the character level: http://www.youborg.com We'd appreciate everyone's feedback and advice! Best, Tim From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 12:01:36 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:01:36 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com><004201c883a8$9c256560$c9be1f97@archimede> <200803111530.43106.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <007b01c88438$d7f01690$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> >> The underground vault reportedly would transmit data >> to strongly guarded receivers on Earth. Brian Bishop> I don't like that: why not transmit for all to hear a message of hope? Any radio transmission from the moon would illuminate a *huge* area on Earth. Unless the transmission is laser based (which I doubt), half world will be able to pick it up. The transmissions should not be encrypted, though. I don't think spinning magnetic hard disks are a good media to store this kind of data. Some non-magnetic, non-volatile, solid state means should be used instead. From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 12:38:29 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:38:29 +1100 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 11/03/2008, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > As I wrote above, each one of us corresponds to only one shape. Individual > shapes my partially overlap, sharing some parts, and there are gazillions of > physically distinguishable states in each "I", like very close relatives > populating the googolplexes of universe-states, but there are no "copies". > Just like there is only one square, there is only one of me-trees. You can't > faithfully copy the mathematical being, a square. A square that is located > in the same place, of the same size, with same relation to other > mathematical shapes is still the same square. To make a copy you need to > change its relationship to other structures - but maths is unchangeable. > Math, the Platonic realm, can be only discovered, not changed. So if you try > to make an identical copy of me, you can't do it. You can produce new nodes > on my tree of life by exposing me to new stimuli - to say it timelessly, > there may be correlations between your actions and the shape of my future > but you can't copy the whole thing. A million brains running exactly the > same thought, down to the quantum level or below, is only one brain. A > million brains that are similar enough to produce the same macroscopic-level > thoughts, words and actions but differing at the quantum scale may represent > true copies but personally I don't care about them - they do not differ in > the higher-order correlations I mentioned above as necessary for > consciousness. Why bother running them if they don't materially change the > shape of all my thoughts? I might object to such copies being tortured, > since they would increase the measure of pain in the me-tree. Timelessly > said, the preference inherent in my structure (hopefully) correlates with a > small measure of quantum-level painful states and with a large number of > interesting, or pleasant macrostates (i.e. groups of microstates > corresponding to a single thought). One of the problems with ensemble theories is how to derive probabilities. If there's one version(s) of you that wins the lottery and another version(s) that doesn't win the lottery, does that mean you have a 1/2 chance of winning the lottery, or what? It is here that considering *relative* measure can be helpful: it makes no difference to me if the absolute number of instantiations of me increases a millionfold (in fact, it could have just happened then and I wouldn't know it), but it does make a difference if the number of copies holding a winning lottery ticket is increased a millionfold relative to the other copies. Now, it's not so straightforward if we accept a form of modal realism, since as you point out it doesn't make sense to talk about there being a specific number of abstract squares. (Incidentally, I think of consciousness as part of the abstract nature of computation, as squareness is part of the abstract nature of a square. A physical instantiation of the computation then allows us to interact with the consciousness, as a physical instantiation of a square allows us to tile the bathroom.) We therefore have to arrive at a measure via a different means. One way to look at it would be using Kolmogorov complexity: those structures that are produced as output of a shorter program are more likely. The universe we live in could be seen as the output of a program with some simple starting parameters and physical laws, whereas a universe where all sorts of weird and arbitrary things keep happening would need a longer program to specify the weirdness. Thus, although on the face of it there are many, many more ways for the universe to suddenly turn weird than remain lawful, the lawful universe is more likely. -- Stathis Papaioannou From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Mar 12 13:58:01 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 06:58:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: [Once more, this time with the link.] On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Jef Allbright wrote: > Another excellent and highly applicable post by Eliezer on the > Overcoming Bias blog. > Internalize this, and you're prepared to see how silly it is to argue > about personal identity on an ontological basis of what is, rather > than in epistemological terms of perceived agency. > > - Jef > From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 12 15:21:28 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:21:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind References: Message-ID: <026b01c88455$346f86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jef writes > Another excellent and highly applicable post by Eliezer on the > Overcoming Bias blog. > > > > Internalize this, and you're prepared to see how silly it is to argue > about personal identity on an ontological basis of what is, rather > than in epistemological terms of perceived agency. Yes, I liked very much that essay too, for a number of reasons. But as I said recently in the thread "The Many Dimensional Sculpture..." (paraphrased slightly) One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important one, is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many others---should instruct us about what actions to take and what decisions to make. and Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and what I can expect the different outcomes to be like. And so I prefer to pose situations that call for decisions, for actions. Only those test whether two people are really agreeing or not. Otherwise, the terminological confusions and irreconcilable philosophies may be simply moot. By "copies" in these and similar threads, we always meant copies of a version-of-you in a tiny branch of the overall multiverse. * Action Item: Should I dare teleport? My analysis: the remote version-of-you is well within the fuzzy sphere (I haven't figured out how to translate this answer into Rafal's language) My answer is YES! * Action Item: Do I benefit from the replication of copies that become a tiny bit different almost at once, and then have different thoughts as they go off and explore many different planets? Should I pay for that? Analysis: Either on Rafal's analysis or mine, the answer is "YES". He'd say one's tree of life is enriched, I'd say one get more runtime. If I recall correctly, you don't have a lot of patience with these kinds of real decisions because all that matters is whether the world as a result more increasingly subscribes to and implements increasing awareness and ever increasingly better approaches to progress, or some such. (Am I warm? :-) But unless you delineate very exact, sharp *decisions* and *actions* in scenarios that serve to distinguish your beliefs from everyone else---and put less emphasis on the abstract hard-to-follow verbiage---then you won't be facing up to the true challenge, namely, prescribing courses of action. Lee From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Mar 12 13:55:25 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 06:55:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind Message-ID: Another excellent and highly applicable post by Eliezer on the Overcoming Bias blog. Internalize this, and you're prepared to see how silly it is to argue about personal identity on an ontological basis of what is, rather than in epistemological terms of perceived agency. - Jef From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 12 16:14:31 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:14:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism Message-ID: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> "Bryan: " Free Will vs. Determinism. They do not seem to be at ends with each other. The best solution is to assume you have free will. Maybe we can start another thread for this, if we haven't come to this conclusion before." ___________ Hi, concepts of "Free Will" vs. "Determinism" are merely concepts of duality. The advent of thoughts/language serve to define as well as divide/categorize the organic and inorganic world for instance for the advantage of one who desires to live longer. Organic living things depend on the inorganic elements to live so where is free will there when one is dependent on something that appears unconscious like rocks and minerals or atoms and molecules? Does this mean the processes of nature {genes and environment} determine man's behavior? Like it or not, there is no free will. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 12 16:53:21 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:53:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Reconceptualized hero Message-ID: <8CA5278B6ACD11F-D7C-8D1@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> "> Perhaps a Boddhisattva is a reconceptualized hero?" Zindell was influenced by Vedanta philosophy; with my little knowledge of Buddhism and Zen, perhaps you could tell me how far off the Boddhisattva is from Vedanta? :) - Bryan _____________ Vedanta emphasized the concept of ultimate reality/Brahman or a permanent ground of all beings whatever name you call it, this Vedanta philosophy is just a concept and some who mistakenly believed the existence of a god or gods are blind to the real cause of their suffering. Zen Buddhism is neither a philosophy nor a belief. A Boddhisattva practice is the ultimate sacrifice without depending on preconceived notion of a being like god or a hero. Terry From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 17:27:09 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:27:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) In-Reply-To: <007b01c88438$d7f01690$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com> <200803111530.43106.kanzure@gmail.com> <007b01c88438$d7f01690$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <200803121227.10046.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 12 March 2008, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > I don't think spinning magnetic hard disks are a good media to store > this kind of data. Some non-magnetic, non-volatile, solid state means > should be used instead. I don't know any simple flash/ROM manufacturing techniques. Know any? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 17:43:32 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:43:32 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) References: <2d6187670803111017x75c41ca6hc2c825f9cc6e2c27@mail.gmail.com><200803111530.43106.kanzure@gmail.com><007b01c88438$d7f01690$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <200803121227.10046.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <002d01c88468$9c95d730$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> > On Wednesday 12 March 2008, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: >> I don't think spinning magnetic hard disks are a good media to store >> this kind of data. Some non-magnetic, non-volatile, solid state means >> should be used instead. Brian> I don't know any simple flash/ROM manufacturing techniques. Know any? Personally not. But I can't manufacture hard disks either. Would you like to borrow my pendrive? From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 18:14:06 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:14:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism In-Reply-To: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803121314.06885.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 12 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Hi, concepts of "Free Will" vs. "Determinism" are merely concepts of > duality. The advent of thoughts/language serve to define as well as I do not see it as an issue of duality ("mind-brain" silly stuff). I know that the brain is implemented on matter/energy and where it is. > divide/categorize the organic and inorganic world for instance for > the advantage of one who desires to live longer. What? > Organic living things depend on the inorganic elements to live so > where is free will there when one is dependent on something that How about emergence? Starting with cellular automata rules, you cannot implicitly determine the specific structures that will emerge from a starting configuration. > appears unconscious like rocks and minerals or atoms and molecules? Funny, my neurons process virtually all my conciousness but none of them are concious of anything at all. You seem to agree that consciousness is not some magical sauce, right? > Does this mean the processes of nature {genes and environment} > determine man's behavior? Man is not so separate from nature as you might think. > Like it or not, there is no free will. And what if you are wrong? It's best to maximize your behaviors as if you had free will, otherwise you lose out (this is a modified Pascal's wager, without the religious undertones). - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Mar 12 18:34:33 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:34:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind In-Reply-To: References: <026b01c88455$346f86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: Sorry, critical correction: On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Jef Allbright wrote: > Within a fully defined context (Peano arithmetic, predicate logic, ==> Within a well-defined context (Peano arithmetic, predicate logic, Apologies to the spirit of Kurt G?del. - Jef From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 19:13:36 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:13:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Next interesting events in Second Life Message-ID: <470a3c520803121213n34a98331x17dd6316689840c7@mail.gmail.com> http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/next_interesting_events_in_second_life/ After Natasha's and Anders' talk last week, there will be three not-to-miss events in Second Life: The first will take place Saturday: Sophrosyne's Saturday Salon: Religion, Spirituality and the Avatar >From Soph's blog: Next week's Salon kicks off a cycle of several months of absolutely fascinating guests. On Saturday, March 15, from 1-3pm at the Central Nexus in Extropia Core, our Salon Spotlight Guest will be Soren Ferlinghetti (Robert M Geraci). Robert M. Geraci is Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at Manhattan College in New York City. He studies the interactions of religion, science and technology with particular emphasis upon robotics, artificial intelligence and (more recently) online gaming. he has conducted fieldwork at Carnegie Mellon University's Robotics Institute and in Second Life through discussions and interviews. In addition to publishing a number of essays on religion and robotics, he has just finished a book on the subject (tentatively titled _Apocalyptic AI: Visions of Heaven in Robotics, Artificial Intelligence and Virtual Reality_) and is planning a new book about religion and online games. Soren and I have spoken occasionally over many months about spirituality and identity in the digital world. We have profoundly different perspectives, and attitudes towards technology in general, but I've always found him curious, open-minded, warm-hearted and fascinating. Soren's work was recently covered in New World Notes: The Soul Of Second Life: In SL Spirituality Survey, 48% Open To Mind Upload, 62% To New SL-Based Religions Thanks to Hamlet Au, we not only got Soren's remarkable conclusions (more people go to church in SL than have sex, what?!), but the raw data supporting them. At the Salon we'll discuss Soren's research, the interplay between spirituality and identity in the digital world, the evolution of religion, and many more fascinating topics sparked by his work. This one's a must-see! The SL Spirituality Survey is very interesting. In the comment thread there is a discussion on the feasibility and possible timeline of mind uploading with, of course, a very wide range of opinions. My comments: Of course when mind uploading technology is perfected (I would say, minimum 2050 and it could be much much longer), Second Life will not be today's Second Life and probably will not be called Second Life. At that moment there will be fully immersive, 100% realistic interfaces based on direct neural stimulation and a sort of instant telepathy between different users and groups. The concept of uploading to the metaverse is certainly interesting. Is what we are really doing in Second Life the preparation of a future home? To all those who are planning to upload to SL next week: unfortunately this technology is _very_ far in the future: some experts say to years, some experts say hundreds of years, some experts say never. The next two events will be organized by the SL-Transhumanists group. Dave Pearce (yes, Dave, the hidden founder of the WTA and one of the most interesting transhumanist thinkers, will give a talk and a Q/A session on Utopian Neuroscience on Sunday March 23. Then Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association will give a talk on Transfigurism (the very interesting mix of Transhumanism and Mormonism of the MTA) and also discuss whether and how the "MTA model" could or should be used by transhumanists of other Christian denominations. Lincoln's talk is scheduled for Sunday March 30 (to be confirmed). Watch translook.com for announcements. From benboc at lineone.net Wed Mar 12 19:26:41 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47D82E71.4090200@lineone.net> Um, is it just me, then, that sees something fundamentally daft about this idea of storing information about how to bootstrap a civilisation in a form that can only be accessed by a civilisation that already has a pretty advanced technology base? I'd think people would develop agriculture before radio, no? And if the idea is that the radios would be there for them, why not just inscribe the info. on lots of stone tablets, or monoliths etc.? Probably easier, more durable, and more likely to work, i'd have thought. Anyway, how are they supposed to know what radios are, or how to use them? Instructions written on stone tablets? ... ben zaiboc From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 21:56:02 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:56:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Is this the future of the United States? Message-ID: <2d6187670803121456u298f219cvd066015a736e996@mail.gmail.com> This is a nine minute long "mini documentary" about how the U.S. is headed toward a North American version of the EU, and how that may not be a good thing. I was wondering if the list members would see this as "conspiracy theory" nonsense or a real possibility. Please actually view the entire video before posting about it. John Grigg *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuBo4E77ZXo* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 22:19:04 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:19:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) In-Reply-To: <47D82E71.4090200@lineone.net> References: <47D82E71.4090200@lineone.net> Message-ID: <200803121719.04069.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 12 March 2008, ben wrote: > Um, is it just me, then, that sees something fundamentally daft about > this idea of storing information about how to bootstrap a > civilisation in a form that can only be accessed by a civilisation > that already has a pretty advanced technology base? Yep. They say they want to have some hardcore guarded 'receivers' on the planet's surface, but this means government facilities probably, which means it'd be inaccessible to the public. Kind of weird. > Anyway, how are they supposed to know what radios are, or how to use > them? Instructions written on stone tablets? ... Hm. We need a self-replicating Gutenberg press. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 12 22:29:15 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:29:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> "Suntan coming soon in a syringe near you" [sorry, no url available] A DRUG that could give a suntan via an injection is a step closer to hitting the market after European authorities granted it a special status to speed up its development. The drug, CUV1647, triggers the production of melanin, giving colour to the skin for 60 days after a capsule, the size of a rice grain, is injected. At this stage, the drug is being developed as a remedy for erythropoietic porphyria, a genetic disease characterised by severe light sensitivity, but the possible cosmetic applications of the drug are significant. Among those seeking a suntan, there may be an initial reluctance to the injection in the lower back each 60 days. But at a briefing yesterday, a parallel was drawn with botox, developed to treat muscle spasms but popularly injected to reduce signs of ageing. The drug could help prevent skin cancer. There are 40,000 cases of the disease diagnosed each year and it is common among organ transplant patients because of the immune-suppressant medication they take. Incidence of the genetic disorder are rare ? there are believed to be about 30,000 sufferers worldwide ? making the market unattractive to drug developers. But this rarity has helped the drug achieve an "orphan medicinal product" designation by the European Medicines Agency, giving the drug's developers benefits including fee reductions, access to European approval procedures and protocol assistance. The drug, made by German-Australian company Clinuvel Pharmaceuticals, is due to undergo a phase-three trial next year for the genetic disorder, the final regulatory hurdle before it can be sold in Europe. So far the drug has passed the other phases without significant safety concerns. Clinuvel chairman Roger Aston said there were opportunities for "more diverse applications" and the company had so far retained all rights to the technology. As the product approached commercialisation, Clinuvel would work with partners with experience and financial muscle when it sought to bring it to the market. Dr Aston said the later in the regulatory approval process the company chose to license its products, the greater the royalty it would enjoy because of the reduced risk of failure. He said biotechnology companies that licensed their products at phase three of clinical testing, which Clinuvel is considering, could anticipate royalties of between 25% and 60%. The regulator's decision, which culminated a nine-month application process for Clinuvel, was a significant step, chief executive Philippe Wolgen said. "Achieving orphan drug status has always been a core company ambition," he said. Clinuvel closed up 2.5?, or 7.6%, to 35.5? on the Australian Stock Exchange yesterday. The company is also listed on the German DAX and trades in the US using American depositary receipts. From pjmanney at gmail.com Wed Mar 12 23:35:52 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:35:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803121635p67c74d4axd6944ef0b241a9f1@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > "Suntan coming soon in a syringe near you" > A DRUG that could give a suntan via an injection > is a step closer to hitting the market after > European authorities granted it a special status to speed up its development. > > The drug, CUV1647, triggers the production of > melanin, giving colour to the skin for 60 days > after a capsule, the size of a rice grain, is injected. I've been following this stuff for a long time. It's even mentioned in my book. The company used to call it "Epitan" or "Melanotan I" http://www.clinuvel.com/en/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanotan http://www.ausbiotech.org/directory/details.asp?companyid=%7B617195E8-FB6B-4479-B4F0-8D4490172DD1%7D&returntourl=%2Fdirectory%2Falphabeticalindex.asp and as soon as it's proven safe and effective, I think my son and I will be the first in line. He's a classic freckle-faced "ginger kid"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_Kids http://www.gingerkids.org/index.html ...and he's sick of it, but mostly just sick of wearing sunblock all the time and little old ladies going gaga over his hair. (South Park's brilliant humiliation, which we both think is funny as hell, not withstanding) PJ From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 12 23:17:05 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:17:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] gun control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <252772.29216.qm@web27010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> >... Oh, and Damien, when do we get started on a "gun >control" thread? > We >should really contact Mike Lorrey and Joe Dees >first... ; ) John >Ahhhh, let's not do that, shall we? >spike Oh, go on, you know there's nothing like gun control to get American blood flowing while the rest of us watch on in boredom, it's even more heated than the Stefano haters. Plus, if you had a gun control topic, us British people could wade in with smart alec comments like "America - government by the terrorist for the terrorists" and inflame things even more. Then again, maybe not :) __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. The World's Favourite Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 12 23:26:39 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:26:39 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] the vatican's seven social sins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <985994.59340.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> > The seven social sins are: > > 1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control > > 2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research > > 3. Drug abuse > > 4. Polluting the environment > > 5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor > > 6. Excessive wealth > > 7. Creating poverty I'm now getting the urge to break all these. So, if I create a company capable of human germline engineering (breaking 1 and 2), instead of sharing it with all humanity equally take advice from some of my American extropian colleagues on intellectual property and use it to help the rich design their babies, I can break 6 as I get rich, and break 5 by making there exist a genetic divide between rich and poor. With my wealth, I'd then create a safe ecstasy-type drug that makes people feel empathic and "loved-up" towards their fellow man (breaking 3), and to put the afghan druglords out of business release a genetically-engineered disease that wipes out their opium poppies (polluting the environment (4) and making poor afghan farmers destitute (7) ) and producing opium in legal plantations from my own protected opium poppies (more rule 6 wealth). Time to apply for that PhD in biotechnology I feel. Tom __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. The World's Favourite Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 13 00:08:33 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:08:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Vatican added 7 Social Sins Message-ID: <8CA52B582DE6318-123C-D7C@webmail-md15.sysops.aol.com> "7. Creating poverty That's a tough one. Any takers? - Bryan ____________ What is poverty? Is it a state of mind or material deprivation found in under -developed as well as some developed countries? The Vatican creates thoughts of guilt, fear and ignorance. Some would donate money to the church to gain merit or escape from feelings of guilt/ a hope for pardon of the sins they committed. Psychological distress are statistically higher in developed countries than in developing nations due to control freaks residing in the Vatican. Terry From clementlawyer at hotmail.com Thu Mar 13 01:20:15 2008 From: clementlawyer at hotmail.com (James Clement) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:20:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803121635p67c74d4axd6944ef0b241a9f1@mail.gmail.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803121635p67c74d4axd6944ef0b241a9f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: PJ - have you seen South Park's Eric Cartman give his class speech titled "Ginger Kids," http://southpark.comedycentral.com/videos.jhtml?videoId=103645&episodeId=103676 JWC -------------------------------------------------- From: "PJ Manney" Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 4:35 PM To: "ExI chat list" Subject: Re: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Damien Broderick > wrote: >> "Suntan coming soon in a syringe near you" >> A DRUG that could give a suntan via an injection >> is a step closer to hitting the market after >> European authorities granted it a special status to speed up its >> development. >> >> The drug, CUV1647, triggers the production of >> melanin, giving colour to the skin for 60 days >> after a capsule, the size of a rice grain, is injected. > > I've been following this stuff for a long time. It's even mentioned in my > book. > > The company used to call it "Epitan" or "Melanotan I" > > http://www.clinuvel.com/en/ > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanotan > http://www.ausbiotech.org/directory/details.asp?companyid=%7B617195E8-FB6B-4479-B4F0-8D4490172DD1%7D&returntourl=%2Fdirectory%2Falphabeticalindex.asp > > and as soon as it's proven safe and effective, I think my son and I > will be the first in line. He's a classic freckle-faced "ginger > kid"... > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_Kids > http://www.gingerkids.org/index.html > > ...and he's sick of it, but mostly just sick of wearing sunblock all > the time and little old ladies going gaga over his hair. (South Park's > brilliant humiliation, which we both think is funny as hell, not > withstanding) > > PJ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From ain_ani at yahoo.com Wed Mar 12 12:59:40 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) Message-ID: <391079.33092.qm@web31510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I think they mean that the receivers are protected against attack/sabotage, don't they? Not that the signal itself would be guarded (after all, if this is provision for the collapse of civilisation the signal has to be accessible even if all records of an encryption key were lost...) Mike ----- Original Message ---- From: Henrique Moraes Machado To: ExI chat list Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 12:01:36 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Earth repositories (on the Moon) >> The underground vault reportedly would transmit data >> to strongly guarded receivers on Earth. Brian Bishop> I don't like that: why not transmit for all to hear a message of hope? Any radio transmission from the moon would illuminate a *huge* area on Earth. Unless the transmission is laser based (which I doubt), half world will be able to pick it up. The transmissions should not be encrypted, though. I don't think spinning magnetic hard disks are a good media to store this kind of data. Some non-magnetic, non-volatile, solid state means should be used instead. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 03:06:27 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:06:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803121635p67c74d4axd6944ef0b241a9f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803122006h9da31b6jd9518775d4c480a6@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:20 PM, James Clement wrote: > PJ - have you seen South Park's Eric Cartman give his class speech titled > "Ginger Kids," > http://southpark.comedycentral.com/videos.jhtml?videoId=103645&episodeId=103676 Of course! That was what I was referencing. Matt Stone and Trey Parker are in my satirical pantheon with Stephen Colbert, Mark Twain, Weird Al Yankovic and the writers of "The Simpsons" and "Dr. Strangelove". PJ From pjmanney at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 03:09:04 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:09:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Finally--inject-a-tan upcoming phase-3 testing In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803122006h9da31b6jd9518775d4c480a6@mail.gmail.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080312172632.0253b128@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803121635p67c74d4axd6944ef0b241a9f1@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803122006h9da31b6jd9518775d4c480a6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803122009k15e9b13coeaea3705b3b543b5@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 8:06 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:20 PM, James Clement > wrote: > > PJ - have you seen South Park's Eric Cartman give his class speech titled > > "Ginger Kids," That's why I included this site before: http://www.gingerkids.org/index.html You'll notice the site is a prank based on the episode, describing "Gingervitis" as a genetic disease that creates redheaded children -- who have no souls. PJ From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Thu Mar 13 05:23:45 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:23:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] Seven deadly social sins Message-ID: <503386.48177.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Someone wrote "The seven social sins are": >1. "Bio ethical" violations such as birth control >2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell >research >3. Drug abuse >4. Polluting the environment >5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and >poor >6. Excessive wealth >7. Creating poverty 1) The essence of birth is created by a "humane" woman and man. The ethical reasons of creating afterlife is disputable. I am really curious as to know how men have any say what goes on with the body of a woman? 2) You can't hide DNA behaviour 3) What is considered a drug? 4) I recognize that recycling is important. 5) This is such a stupid statement. The rich will feel poor, the poor will feel rich, the rich will be rich, the poor will be poor. 6) I have so much money I have no idea what to do with it? Think about that. 7) Why would anybody want anybody to be poor and suffer? My 2 cents:) Anna Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 13 06:12:21 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:12:21 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind Message-ID: Jef Allbright: >[Once more, this time with the link.] > >On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Jef Allbright jefallbright.net> wrote: >> Another excellent and highly applicable post by Eliezer on the >> Overcoming Bias blog. > > I think that I committed the Mind Projection Fallacy last night. My friend and I exited my work building at precisely the time that the building's fire alarm went off. I was sure that we had triggered the alarm when we exited the doors, but that wasn't true. I had nothing to do with the alarm. The workers in the parking garage below had triggered the alarm. Since the extropians archives don't go back to 2002-3, I'll paste something I wrote to the list a couple of my lifetimes ago. Amara -----------------------------September 13. 2002 To: extropians at extropy.org From: Amara Graps Subject: Physics and Interpretations (was Postmodernists have nothing useful to contribute) Serafino: >Bohr wrote (in 'The Unity of Science') " [Complementarity >should] be seen as a logical expression of our situation >concerning objective description in this area of experience. The >realization that the interaction between measuring devices and >the physical systems forms an integrating part of quantum >phenomena, has not only revealed an unexpected limitation of the >mechanistic view of nature which attributes well defined >properties to the objects themselves, but it has forced us to >give special attention to the problem of observation when >ordering the experiences. " >Bohr also wrote (in Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, Wiley, >1959) " ... a subsequent measurement to a certain degree >deprives the information given by a previous measurement of its >significance for predicting the future course of phenomena. >Obviously, these facts not only set a limit to the extent of the >information obtainable by measurement, but they also set a limit >to the meaning which we may attribute to such information. We >meet here in a new light the old truth that in our description >of nature the purpose is not to disclose the real essence of the >phenomena but only to track down, so far as it possible, >relations between the manifold aspects of our experience." >Note he uses the terms 'information' and 'limit'. They are the very >essence of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Yes, in that Bohr's 'Copenhagen Theory' says that even when the QM state vector gives only probabilities, it is a complete description of reality in the sense that nothing more can ever be known; not because of technological limitations, but because of fundamental principles. But Jaynes seems pretty convinced ('Clearing Up Mysteries,the Original Goal') about Bohr's way of perceiving physics problems. He says that persistent in Bohr's writings (which Jaynes calls vague, puzzling, foglike) is a common logical structure which indicates that Bohr was never on the ontological level traditional in physics. Always he discussing _not_ Nature, but our _information_ about Nature, but that physics at that time did not have the vocabulary for expressing ideas on that level, so then his words appeared muddy. About Dirac: I learned (from Jaynes' writings) Dirac was working with Harald Jeffreys (a Bayesian ...) side by side for a little while at St. John's College, and he seems to have not realized what Jeffrey's probability theory could offer, that is, a vehicle for expressing epistemological notions quantitatively. Jaynes said that if either Bohr or Dirac understood the work of Jeffreys, the recent history of theoretical physics might have been very different: they would have the language and the technical apparatus with which Bohr's ideas could be stated and worked out precisely without mysticism. Had they done this, and explained clearly the distinction between the ontological and epistemological levels, Einstein would have understood it and accepted it. It seems to me that the Q.M. Bayesian folks should collect their papers plus the much older work going back to the first half of last century and put it in a book for more accessibility. There is a lot of Bayesian literature on this Q.M. topic going back 50 years but it is a really scattered. If the handful of Q.M. Bayesians that I met at my first (and only) MaxEnt conference four years ago is a representative number, then there must be a couple dozen people in the world actively working on this topic at present. Anyway, "if, then, should, could.." I've already written (too) many times about Bayesian stuff in past years on this list and I have bigger things on my plate, as you know. I'll simply summarize with some things that a former Bayesian acquaintance told me four years ago while I was writing a popular science article about this Bayesian stuff. Amara ---------------------- ---------------------- A summary: "Who are The Bayesians?" by A. Gottvald, September 1998. The Bayesians assert that: Our inference is always conditional to some prior information, involving also our data. There is nothing like "unconditional probability". All human's knowledge is _conditional_. Probability of an event is interpreted as a state of our knowledge about the event. Probability of an event (and consequently, an information about the event) is not an absolute physical attribute of the event, but rather a model representing our state of knowledge abou thte event. For a Bayesian, the information is neither a physically existing nor an absolute "fluid" flowing from a transmitter to a receiver; the information is unseparable from a prior state of our mind. An orthodox 'frequentist' interpretation of probability, in terms of "random variable", is only a very special case of a Bayesian concept of probability. Bayesians does not use the concept of a "random variable" approaching a probability in a limit, as it is too restrictive and fuzzy for many phenomena. A probability of probability represents a difference between a stability of our state of knowledge about many events. E.g. consider a stable probability assigned to a dice, versus an unstable probability assigned ot an existence of life on Mars. Using all prior knowledge (contextual information) available is the most objective way to analyze our data (hypotheses). In general, also the data provide some prior knowledge how to analyze them, and the prior knowledge reduces the uncertainty of our inference. A logical relationship between the event (and their probabilities) does not imply a causal (physical) relationship between the events. Here is an origin of a Mind Projection Fallacy, which is behind a huge number of misconceptions and 'paradoxes' in mathematics (set theory, information theory, Fourier transform,...) physics (quantum and relativistic physics, potential, ...) philosophy (Bohr, Einstein, Bohm, Popper, Penrose, ...) which puzzled a big part of science in the [last] century. In contrast, the Bayesian know that when a new fossil changes our picture about a dinosaur, it does not mean that we physically changed something in Jurassic park.) Bayes Theorem is only a multiplication rule of probability theory, which shows a relationship between a posterior probability, a likelihood of data to model, and prior probability. The Bayes Theorem is only an important segment of the probability theory understood as an extended logic of rational inference. The prior probability and posterior probability are not necessarily related in time. These concepts show just a different relationship to the data to be analyzed. The Bayesian methodologies approach the scientific inference from "first principles", grasping an n-parametric event directly with an n-dimensional posterior probability distribution. This general model shows a systematic straightforward way to integrate out some nuisance parameters, to compute maximum unbiased estimations of parameters, to evaluate probabilities of hypotheses, etc. As a practical rule, the Bayesian methodology (of inference) assign practically identical probabilities to the events (parameter estimations) only in an abstract limit, when no prior knowledge about the event is available. When some prior information is available, the Bayesian methodology is superior in detecting some existing and refusing some non-existing phenomena. In summary, the Bayesians deal with the uncertainty of our inference, and its fundamental relationship to prior information. They clarify some puzzling relationships between our data, our models, and our prior and posterior knowledge. The Bayesians apply their systematic methodology to see neither too much nor too little in our data. They actually apply an extended log of scientific inference, which translates our human's knowledge to some rational statements about our external perceptions. ---------------------- -- *********************************************************************** 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/ *********************************************************************** "There's only one thing more beautiful than a beautiful dream, and that's a beautiful reality." --Ashleigh Brilliant -----------------wta-talk June 18, 2003 To: wta-talk at yahoogroups.com From: Amara Graps Subject: Re: Bayes vs. LP Cc: extropians at extropy.org (ccing extropians too, only because this topic has appeared there before) "bzr" , Sun, 15 Jun 2003: >However, perhaps the easiest way to see that the Bayesian framework won't do >as a comprehensive framework for science, and why it assuredly can't proxy >as the whole of a philosophy of science, is to consider this problem: >We have a penny. We toss it. What are the odds that we'll get heads? >The answer: 0 >Zero? Yes. This is very counterintuitive, admittedly, particularly for >statisticians. However, the truth is there are no "odds" here at all. >Penny tossing is deterministic. >That being the case, if we are appraised of all the initial >conditions of the toss, and possess a complete knowledge of the laws >of physics, then we can predict with certainty what we will get >(heads,or tails, or, very rarely, a coin on edge). Even more >interestingly (and counterintuitively), without any knowledge of >statistics OR knowlege of physics we can be sure that, provided the >test surface is flat, we will get heads, tails, or a coin on its >edge. I think that using determinism in this way is putting up a smoke screen in addition to missing the large picture of how scientists intuitively do science. You have a real experiment, so it is physical, and all propositions are testable. How do you define determinism for this system? Your determinism is based on a model of some physics, is it not? No matter how 'deterministic' something may be, your prediction for the outcome of the coin toss is based on data and a model and what other information you have about that system. A Bayes discussion is always in the realm of epistemology, i.e. how we know what we know. Humans never know how nature _is_. All humans can do is make an abstract physical description of nature. Scientific studies are how we are able to process information in order to say some things about that nature. Bayesian concepts makes this process explicit. A Bayesian perspective of science says that any theory about reality can have no consequences testable by us, unless that theory can also describe what humans can see and know. Models, data, prior information, in other words. Note also how causality takes a side seat. A logical relationship between the event (and their probabilities) does not imply a causal (physical) relationship between the events. Sometimes Bayesians call this the Mind Projection Fallacy, which is behind a huge number of misconceptions and 'paradoxes' in mathematics (set theory, information theory, Fourier transform,...) physics (quantum and relativistic physics, potential, ...) philosophy (Bohr, Einstein, Bohm, Popper, Penrose, ...). Bayes Theorem is only a multiplication rule of probability theory, which shows a relationship between a posterior probability, a likelihood of data to model, and prior probability. The prior probability and posterior probability are not necessarily related in time. These concepts show just a different relationship to the data to be analyzed. The Bayesian methodologies approach the scientific inference from "first principles", grasping an n-parametric event directly with an n-dimensional posterior probability distribution. >The question of why statistical analysis "works" (to the extent that >it does, and given an initial state of ignorance), or indeed the >question of what conditions must pertain in order for statistical >analysis to be appropriate, is not itself answerable by further >statistical analysis. No. Some history. The Bayesian probabilistic ideas have been around since the 1700s. Bernoulli, in 1713, recognized the distinction between two definitions of probability: (1) probability as a measure of the plausibility of an event with incomplete knowledge, and (2) probability as the long-run frequency of occurrence of an event in a sequence of repeated (sometimes hypothetical) experiments. The former (1) is a general definition of probability adopted by the Bayesians. The latter (2) is called the "frequentist" view, sometimes called the "classical", "orthodox" or "sampling theory" view. Scientists who rely on frequentist definitions, while assigning their uncertainties for their measurements, should be careful. The concept of sampling theory, or the statistical ensemble, in astronomy, for example, is often not relevant. A gamma-ray burst is a unique event, observed once, and the astronomer needs to know what uncertainty to place on the one data set he/she actually has, not on thousands of other hypothetical gamma-ray burst events. And similarly, the astronomer who needs to assign uncertainty to the large-scale structure of the Universe needs to assign uncertainties based on _our_ particular Universe, because there are not similar Observations in each of the "thousands of universes like our own." The version of Bayes' Theorem that statisticians use today is actually the generalized version due to Laplace. One particularly nice example of Laplace's Bayesian work was his estimation of the mass of Saturn, given orbital data from various astronomical observatories about the mutual perturbations of Jupiter and Saturn, and using a physical argument that Saturn's mass cannot be so small that it would lose its rings or so large that it would disrupt the Solar System. Laplace said, in his conclusion, that the mass of Saturn was (1/3512) of the solar mass, and he gave a probability of 11,000 to 1 that the mass of Saturn lies within 1/100 of that value. He should have placed a bet, because over the next 150 years, the accumulation of data changed his estimate for the mass of Saturn by only 0.63% ... More references that might be useful: General for scientists: (article) A.L. Graps, "Probability Offers Link Between Theory and Reality," Scientific Computing World, October 1998. Focusing more on epistemology: (book) _Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach_ by Colin Howson and Peter Urbach, 1989, Open Court Publishing. Focusing on implementation: (books) _Bayesian Statistics_ (2nd edition) by Peter M. Lee, Oxford University Press, 1997. _Data Analysis: A Bayesian Tutorial_, Sivia, D.S., Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1996. Martz, Harry and Waller, Ray, chapter: "Bayesian Methods" in _Statistical Methods for Physical Science_, Editors: John L. Stanford and Stephen Vardeman [Volume 28 of the Methods of Experimental Physics], Academic Press, 1994, pg. 403-432. Other useful papers on the web: Epistemology Probabilized by Richard Jeffrey http://www.princeton.edu/~bayesway/ Edwin Jaynes: Probability http://bayes.wustl.edu/ "Probability in Quantum Theory", "Clearing up Mysteries- the Original Goal". "Role and Meaning of Subjective Probability: Some Comments on Common Misconceptions." by Giulio D'Agostini http://zeual1.roma1.infn.it/~agostini/prob+stat.html 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/ ******************************************************************** "The understanding of atomic physics is child's play compared with the understanding of child's play." -- David Kresch From jef at jefallbright.net Wed Mar 12 18:21:38 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:21:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind In-Reply-To: <026b01c88455$346f86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <026b01c88455$346f86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important > one, is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many > others---should instruct us about what actions to take and what > decisions to make. > > and > > Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and > what I can expect the different outcomes to be like. Abraham Lincoln said something to the effect that if he knew he had to cut down a tree the next day, he'd spend most of his time until then sharpening his ax. My interest in philosophy is pragmatic, but our key difference is that I emphasize the importance of awareness of an always broader (and ultimately uncertain) context, while you characteristically use terms like "the simple truth" and strive to convey models in "objective" terms. I emphasize the importance of increasing coherence over increasing context. You demonstrate that coherence tends naturally to increase inversely with context. Note that coherence applies only to the map, not the territory. Within a fully defined context (Peano arithmetic, predicate logic, basic game theory...), your approach is beyond reproach. However, within an increasingly uncertain context -- as we find ourselves to be as necessarily subjective agents within a world of accelerating change -- our emphasis should shift away from hopes of an increasingly accurate model of expected consequences, toward increasing effective modeling in principle (to be applied at each moment of decision.) The game itself is evolving (it always was, but we hadn't really noticed) and it's becoming increasingly important not only to act effectively, but to adapt increasingly effectively in order to act increasingly effectively. Wash, rinse, repeat. > And so I prefer to pose situations that call for decisions, for > actions. The first several years of my professional life I was a successful, even gifted, troubleshooter of scientific instruments, applying my skills to correcting problems and achieving customer satisfaction. Of course, I was so good at that role that I was promoted out of it, and asked to manage, teach and train others. Which I did for the next 20+ years. And I found that some of my most talented engineers were blind to the importance of context. Some would brilliantly address electro-mechanical problems within the equipment but fail to perceive the importance of the environment of the lab (temperature, humidity, vibration, fluctuating power or ground loops...) Most did recognize the importance of the *physical* environment but then failed to recognize that the customer doesn't really care about the equipment, but rather the technical solutions they provide. Very few realized that in the larger context both equipment and solutions were subordinate to the customer's (mere) perception. The point here is that the hard-core engineer was typically set firmly in his belief that he was acting most decisively in optimizing objective performance of the instrument. Anything else was wishy-washy, vague and abstract. But I would much rather have (and pay) engineers whose primary value was to achieve customer satisfaction, and would then act (including optimizing technical solutions and equipment performance) as appropriate. > Otherwise, the terminological confusions and irreconcilable > philosophies may be simply moot. > But unless you delineate very exact, sharp *decisions* and > *actions* in scenarios that serve to distinguish your beliefs > from everyone else---and put less emphasis on the abstract > hard-to-follow verbiage---then you won't be facing up to > the true challenge, namely, prescribing courses of action. Lee, you discovered many years ago that, contrary to popular individual and cultural biases, it is incoherent to conceive of personal identity as dependent on any particular physical embodiment, nor any "discrete trajectory" of its constituent particles or processes, nor any requirement of a discrete self, tangible or not. In short, you arrived at a functionalist account of personal identity defined in terms of a particular (dynamic) pattern of information. Your model is an improvement, coherent and extensible over a context broader than common-sense, and all the more satisfying and seductive since it appears to offer newfound potential for extended survival of the self. Your view posits exact identity of duplicates at T=0, with identity then diminishing as some function of diverging pattern/functional similarity due to accumulating change brought about by separate paths of interaction with the world. This is delightful, because it means (with logical certainty) that sufficiently (?) similar copies, regardless of displacement in place or time, must be considered (existing/surviving) identical persons. But just as the popular common-sense view fails when extended while yours succeeds, your view fails when extended only to be superseded by a model coherent within an even broader context. Because personal identity is not a property of any object. Personal identity is entirely a function of the observer. Even when the subject *is* the observer. And personal identity based on pattern/function similarity is merely a narrow special case of personal identity based on perceived agency. Personal identity based on perceived agency encompasses and accommodates the preservation of identity over the lifetime of a person, regardless of any degree of physical/functional change due to aging, disfigurement, body-morphing or enhancement, memory-alteration,...to the extent that the agent is perceived as acting on behalf of a particular entity. Personal identity based on perceived agency allows for special-purpose replicants, each a valid instance of "self" to the extent that they act as an agent of a particular entity, regardless of physical (or virtual) form or function. Personal identity based on perceived agency resolves the obvious and immediate paradox of self in direct conflict with self, for instance as a consequence of duplicates stepping out of the duplication machine with both intent on control/enjoyment of the same property, spouse, etc. Personal identity based on perceived agency accommodates the full range of moral/legal/social responsibility and is extensible, without the obvious contradictions of a pattern/functional similarity where, for instance Lee1 is held responsible for the violent actions of his near duplicate Lee2 who went a little crazy while working out in the asteroid mines. Of course this has all been discussed before and in more detail, available in the archives. So Lee, a theory of personal identity more coherent over greater context is available to you. But as the believer in the popular common-sense view must give up an attachment to belief in a discrete self, you must give up an attachment to belief in an ontological self. And everything will be just the same, but with a more coherent model, supporting more effective action. - Jef From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 13 13:32:36 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:32:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Many Dimensional Sculpture, or dont' bother about runtime References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7641ddc60803112052k2eb3aa7bh918713ac16b34d64@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <02ae01c8850f$1cc056f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Rafal wrote, Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:52 PM > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 5:47 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > > (Now I am actually very sympathetic to a definition of "you" that > > states that "you are a fuzzy sphere in the space of all algorithms", > > and that (a version of) you traces out some particular path over > > time. This moving point may leave the sphere so far behind that > > "you become someone else".) ### Yes! [where Rafal omits his rather equivalent description--- see his original March 10 essay that began this thread for essay. > > Many years ago John Clark made an excellent > > case that for A to cause B reduces simply to "A always comes > > before B". Maybe the current branch of the JC tree is doubtful > > of that now, but after lengthy almost endless debate he finally > > convinced me. > > > > Also, the study of "Causality" conducted by Judea Pearl in the > > book of that name makes me highly suspicious of trying to > > reduce causality to correlation. > > ### This is indeed a very thorny issue. I agree that in some sense, > describing causality is more complex than simply pointing to a > correlation. One could even claim that causation can act backwards > in time Yes! At least from a certain (subjective?) vantage point. > - when you predict a supernova explosion, and act accordingly, > it is like a message from the future having an impact on the present. I use Newcomb's Paradox to exemplify one kind of backward seeming causality http://www.leecorbin.com/UseOfNewcombsParadox.html > But in the present context I still think it is fair to say that causation is > a form of correlation. My thoughts correlate with my actions, i.e. the > omniscient observer would be able to calculate the shape of parts of > my tree of life (what is the measure of me that goes to bed in an hour), > by observing other parts of me.... Very well. Although :-) I stay away from "omniscient observes" myself, being as they are so close to G-d. One may simply rephrase using the past tense "the shape of parts of my tree... could be calculated... :-) > > You mean "this version of you wants to live longer", right? > ### Well, actually, wanting to live longer (assuming no severe pain) > is one of the key characteristics of all parts of me. If a mind with my > memories and inclinations is made but it has no built-in desire to live > longer (in the sense of identifying with the branches of me that extend > as far as possible), then that mind is not a part of me. It is its own > little tree of life. Pretty severe! I think that there are personalities among the stars and other branches of the multiverse that are well withing the present fuzzy sphere of Rafals who would differ with you here. A human being is so complex and consists of so many parts that only with extreme caution would I expel all those who differ with me on a sole ideological point. > ### There may be people who would simply refuse to call a > survivor a part of their tree of life. They define themselves as > mortal, and since the definition is all there is to a mathematical > structure, they are mortal. I disagree. I believe that there is a truth to the matter of whether or not a running algorithm lies close to the center of the fuzzy set of algorithms who we here call Rafal, in rather the same way that I believe there to be a truth to the matter of whether or not someone really is Napoleon. Yes, the metric is today not easily defineable, nor, I suspect, will it ever be *precisely* definable, just as a "star" is not precisely definable. > > By "copies" in these and similar threads, we always meant copies > > of a version-of-you in a tiny branch of the overall multiverse. > > ### Yeah, here we agree. I agree that "copies" that are not ideally > identical are indeed separate branches of me, as long as they don't > diverge beyond recognition. Agree completely, though "beyond recognition" *sounds* a little subjective. And here you revert to our customary usage of "copy". ------------------------------------------- > > * Action Item: Do I benefit from the replication of copies that > > become a tiny bit different almost at once, and > > then have different thoughts as they explore > > many different planets? Should I pay for that? > > [Answer: YES] > ### Yes, we agree here. > > Left unanalyzed for now: *Action Item: Do I benefit by the > > multiplication over space of absolutely quantum- > > mechanically equivalent copies. Analysis: later. I think that we're close enough in agreement that we can proceed to this most difficult problem. (Next post, if you're in agreement.) > ### Yes, this quantum mechanical shtick is tough. But I still > don't like the term "runtime" - it seems to imply that running > and re-running the same calculations is important. Heh, heh, that's pretty funny. My very first post to Extropians in Janurary of 1996 was entitled "Repeated Experience", and went right into the heart of this. I do value repeated experience. I wonder if it's worth a detour concerning this before we proceed. Hmm, I rather suspect that it is. > I want new calculations to be performed, so I would spawn > teleporter quality copies to explore, preferably with some > feedback mechanism to prolong cohesion among copies as > they learn new things. I would not rent computronium just to > run the same moment over and over again, like Egan's climber. and I would so rent computers for that purpose (provided I get a good price! :-) I'll start a new thread, "Value of Repeated Experience" to pursue this with you and others---if you agree with me and think that we might profitably attend to this issue first. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 13 14:01:43 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:01:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism References: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> <200803121314.06885.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <02bf01c88513$54eb03a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes >> Does this mean the processes of nature {genes and environment} >> determine man's behavior? > > Man is not so separate from nature as you might think. > >> Like it or not, there is no free will. The "compatibilist position" which I endorse says that free will and determinism are not really in conflict. To me, it ought rightly said that if one makes choices then one has free will. Obversely, one of us will be said to not have free will if he is being compelled, and is "not free" to make his choices. > It's best to maximize your behaviors as if you had free will, > otherwise you lose out. Yes, anyone who claims that he has no free will can always be put on the spot, as everyone knows, by the simple question "about that decision you just made... did you make it freely or did you feel yourself undersome compulsion". And if it turns out that there is a Mafia hit man behind the curtain, it makes sense to say that his decision was compelled rather than free. I go so far as to say that a completely deterministic weather computer program which always reaches the same decision given thesame inputs "decides", say, its probability that there will be a storm. My above arguments really only make complete sense to those who have so thoroughly banished the classical idea of "uncaused events" that free will should never be taken to mean anything but what the compatibalists say. Lee From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 13 14:24:37 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:24:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Seven deadly social sins In-Reply-To: <503386.48177.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803131451.m2DEpLKr007486@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > > Someone wrote "The seven social sins are": > > >1. "Bio ethical" violations such as birth control > >2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell > >research > >3. Drug abuse > >4. Polluting the environment > >5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor > >6. Excessive wealth > >7. Creating poverty > ... Items 4 and 6 are contradictory, becoming ever more so. Those with excessive wealth can afford cleaner technologies for living. Poor is dirty. Actually this is an understatement. Number 8 is self contradictory. There is no such thing as *excessive* wealth. spike From dagonweb at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 15:54:25 2008 From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:54:25 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Seven deadly social sins In-Reply-To: <503386.48177.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <503386.48177.qm@web30403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Anna Taylor wrote: > Someone wrote "The seven social sins are": > > >1. "Bio ethical" violations such as birth control >2. > "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell > >research > >3. Drug abuse > >4. Polluting the environment > >5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and > >poor > >6. Excessive wealth > >7. Creating poverty > 1- This is a dogmatic point in the Catholic religion that will come to haunt them as much as the Copernican blunder, and it will either contribute to the desintegration of the religion in time, or they will recant it with muffled apology. 2- Ditto 3- This is an ideological point that is much harder to shake. The catholics have this fetish with free will and self-determination. To act sinful under the influence of drugs it is clear the person cant act moral while under effect of certain drugs, or when having drawback symptoms (junkies are incapable of moral behaviour - the addiction is too severe) so the paleogoddist church HAS to include this dictum. Taking drugs means surrendering free will to the dictates of the drug. In that regard the church regards drugs as direct competition. 4- Yah sure, the catholics, being a religion of the ages, has learned by now that premature claims of Armageddon make you look dumb. The PR/strategy people of the vatican have probably been whispering "GUYS, project judgement somewhere around when the sun has its red giant phase..." and now the council of bishops is stuck with having to like *survive* on this planet. Plus the catholics target audience is dirt poor people in the thirdworld who may suffer most from environmental collapse. 5- One would almost regard the catholics as moral in saying this. 6- I am not thinking about the wealth Bill Gates manifests, I am thinking more of BLING; extravagance. The kind of wealth that generates envy and hatred - and terrorism! 7- Acting in such a fashion that people are marginalized or pushed into despair. What has been happening in the Congo - rich companies wanting resources, and poor losers getting mowed down in the process. Marketing considerations, clearly. Catholicism is a product. Is it copyrighted? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin.l.holmes at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 16:14:41 2008 From: kevin.l.holmes at gmail.com (Kevin H) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:14:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism In-Reply-To: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA52734A02765D-D7C-64F@webmail-de17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: I think one mistake to make on this question is to suppose that it's a metaphysical (or, in some contexts, religious) question. The problem of free will isn't going to be solved by armchair speculation. Rather, it's a scientific question: the question being, how do we explain human volition? It's a problem of neuroscience and what we need is a lot research in how the brain works. But, we can at least define the problem. At any moment, we can conceive multiple courses of action that we can take, yet we only actually *take* one of them. What determines our chosen course of action? The answer that it is our volition or will that determines our course of action really isn't sufficient, because volition isn't a clear and distinct idea. Rather, it is at best a placeholder for an explanation: it's a word we use to signify an explanation that is missing. The free will problem can be summed up as the question: what exactly is the will? Best regards, *Kevin* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Thu Mar 13 16:51:00 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:51:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind References: Message-ID: <001801c8852a$6b5c7080$deb81f97@archimede> Yakir Aharonov writes: "It is a quite trivial fact that if we acquire new information we can affect the probabilities of events that happened in the past. This happens not only in quantum mechanics but in ordinary classical probabilities as well. For example suppose we have a bag with an equal number of white and black balls and extract one ball at random and put it, without looking, into a bag containing only black balls. The probability that the ball is white is 1/2. But suppose we than extract a ball from the second bag and see that the ball is white. In the light of this new information we can now infer that in this situation the probability that a white ball was extracted from the first bag is actually 1 and not 1/2. The future information affects our knowledge about the past, but there is nothing surprising about this." It is perhaps interesting to point out that Aharonov (et al.) developed a new quantum-mechanical formalism (ABL formalism). According to this two-state time-symmetrical formalism a |ket> vector originates at t1, and it is determined by a time boundary condition in the past and evolves toward the future, while a Bryan's reply: "On Wednesday 12 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Hi, concepts of "Free Will" vs. "Determinism" are merely concepts of > duality. The advent of thoughts/language serve to define as well as I do not see it as an issue of duality ("mind-brain" silly stuff). I know that the brain is implemented on matter/energy and where it is. __________ Since mind is the behavior of the brain it uses energy by thinking in dualistic terms such as you, me for convenience to separate concepts/thoughts like "Free Will" as really existing in nature. We are all thoughts but no independent and permanent thinker/doer. We are part of nature but do not understand everything about the brain processes i.e. how consciousness arise from the seemingly quantum particles of brain matter. Bryan: "How about emergence? Starting with cellular automata rules, you cannot implicitly determine the specific structures that will emerge from a starting configuration." In quantum physics, we start with the four forces of nature to determine how these particles behave according to the laws of physics. From evolutionary biology, we can see the random evolution of the brain which some calls natural selection or determining factor of the genes. Synthesizing the two scientific processes using technological devices, science discovered the evidence of deterministic factor in nature. .> Like it or not, there is no free will. Bryan: "And what if you are wrong? It's best to maximize your behaviors as if you had free will, otherwise you lose out (this is a modified Pascal's wager, without the religious undertones)." ____________ The theory of evolution has stand the test of time. You want to have free will to maximize your behavior? Show me the evidence that free will can do that without thoughts of morality, responsibility and a permanent being. Terry From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 13 18:21:00 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:21:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind In-Reply-To: <001801c8852a$6b5c7080$deb81f97@archimede> References: <001801c8852a$6b5c7080$deb81f97@archimede> Message-ID: On 3/13/08, scerir wrote: > Yakir Aharonov writes: > "It is a quite trivial fact that if we acquire > new information we can affect the probabilities of events > that happened in the past. Trivial, yes. But significantly telling in that it typically generates a strong reaction in people who hear it stated in this way, exposing their predisposition to assume objectivity. - Jef From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 13 18:36:33 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:36:33 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: The news at Boing Boing today that the US federal government thinks that 1 in 300 US residents are terrorists: http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/13/1-in-300-us-resident.html "September 2007 report by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, which reported that the Terrorist Screening Center had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007, and that the list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month.As of today, the list stands at approximately 917,000 names." reminded me how scarily out-of-control and out-of-touch with reality is the Bush administration, with no end in sight (I'm not sure the Congress after the Fall elections will be any better). Since 1 in 300 of US citizens are considered terrorists, a good question is how to get all of those bomb-throwing lunatics locked up? The usual (statist) answer is to throw more money into the black pot, with the usual source of money being you and me. Feel safer now? -------------------- http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10808502 (The study is here: http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/Default.aspx?ID=968 ) Anti-terrorist spending Feel safer now? Mar 6th 2008 From The Economist print edition Most anti-terrorist spending is wasteful, claims a new study AFTER September 11th 2001, most countries beefed up security at airports and other vulnerable places. Tough-looking immigration officials no doubt made passengers feel safer, offsetting the irritation of longer queues. Yet doing something because it makes people feel good is not adequate justification. Is money devoted to counter-terrorism well spent? What claims to be the first serious study of its costs and benefits, by economists at the Universities of Texas at Dallas and Alabama*, says no. It was commissioned by the Copenhagen Consensus, a think-tank that aims to scrutinise public spending on the world's woes and to ask "should we be starting from here?" The authors of the study calculate that worldwide spending on homeland security has risen since 2001 by between $65 billion (if security is narrowly defined) and over $200 billion a year (if one includes the Iraq and Afghan wars). But in either case the benefits are far smaller. Terrorism, the authors say, has a comparatively small impact on economic activity, reducing GDP in affected countries by perhaps $17 billion in 2005. So although the number of terrorist attacks has fallen, and fewer people have been injured, the imputed economic benefits are limited-just a tenth of the costs. That does not necessarily mean the extra spending was wasted. The number of attacks might have been even higher. In 2007 Britain's prime minister, Gordon Brown, said his country had disrupted 15 al-Qaeda plots since 2001. Yet so big is counter-terrorism spending and so limited is terrorism's economic impact that, even if 30 attacks like the London bombings of July 2005 were prevented each year, the benefits would still be lower than the costs. The authors conclude that spending is high because it is an insurance policy against a truly devastating operation such as a dirty bomb; and because, since terrorism is global, if one country improves security, so must others. Terrorists react to incentives. If you tighten airport security, they hit trains. If you improve security at embassies, they kidnap businessmen. If you disrupt routine operations, they try deadlier ones. The authors reckon that, though the number of attacks and injuries has fallen since 2001, deaths have risen. Anti-terrorist spending displaces, as well as reduces, terrorism. To get a sense of what might work better, the authors ask what would happen if spending were raised by 25%. Not much, they think: spending is inefficient now and would remain so. To see what might happen if there were more vigorous military action, they extrapolate from 2002-03, when America's belligerent response to September 11th was beginning. There were fewer terrorist attacks, they say, but the balance of costs and benefits is still poor-between five and eight cents of benefit for every dollar spent. But international co-operation to disrupt terrorist finances would be cost-effective, they think, producing $5-15 of benefits for each $1. Given the uncertainties of the calculations, such figures can hardly be a blueprint for radically reordering spending priorities. But they are a reminder that throwing money at terrorism works no better than throwing money at anything else, and that some kinds of anti-terrorist spending are more efficient than others. * "Transnational Terrorism", by Todd Sandler, Daniel Arce and Walter Enders. www.copenhagenconsensus.com -------------------- Amara From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 18:57:45 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:57:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Ten Regulations" of the Russian Orthodox Church Message-ID: <2d6187670803131157m1f87696dtd3a39482fa5ac660@mail.gmail.com> *I thought that along with our discussion of the Roman Catholic "Seven Deadly Social Sins," we could also evaluate the "Ten Regulations" that the Russian Orthodox Church has issued for Russian business people.* ** *I think Moses was on to something when he came down from the mountain with the powerfully named "Ten Commandments." The "Ten Regulations" sound more like a "revelation" from the Department of Transportation! lol * ** *But I do view the "Ten Regulations" as being much more humane and necessary (especially considering Russia's current state of affairs) than the "Seven Deadly Social Sins." * ** *John Grigg* ** *http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/90/364/120**04_church.html * ** ** *The regulations explain how the rich and the poor must live * Russian businessmen are offered to follow a code of moral principles and regulations in their everyday life and businessactivity. The principles resembling the Ten Biblical Commandments were declared at the Global All-Russian Orthodox Council (Sobor) summoned upon blessing of Patriarchy Alexiy II on February 4. Authors of the code of moral principles say that the document was developed with participation of representatives from the Russian Union of Businessmen and Industrialists, the Business Russia and OPORa organizations. Gazeta learnt that main objective of the code is "to maximally introduce business into the public sphere; nobody will judge businessmen according to the laws of the country but businessmen themselves will judge their own conscience." Thus, one of the precepts warns businessmen that wealth is not an end in itself: it must serve for creation of good life of a man and the nation. As for taxes, the authors of the code explain that tax evasion is "stealing from orphans, the aged, disabled and other unprotected categories of people." The document says that payment of taxes for needs of the society must no longer be a burden or a forced duty; this must be honorary doing deserving gratitude of the society. The regulations also explain how the poor should live: "Poor people must behave with dignity, aim at efficient labor and improve their professional skills to overcome poverty." The Charter was developed for about a year. Originally, the document was developed by a commission headed by President of the National Economy Academy Vladimir Mau and consisting of Deputy Chairman of the Federal Commission for the Securities Market Yelena Katayeva, Duma deputy Sergey Glazyev and public relations department of the Moscow Patriarchy. In January 2004, businessmen also joined the commission to develop the document. No names of the businessmen were reported. Metropolitan Kirill told Gazeta that it was not registered who exactly introduced different amendments to the document. The metropolitan says that all largest associations of Russian industrialists took part in development of the document. It is said that even writers and philologists took part in discussion of the Charter. The church will publicly condemn those who ignore the regulations. However, it is not clear whether atheists and people of other religions must follow the precepts as well. What is more, even though the Council (Sobor) was blessed by the patriarchy, it is not the church, and we cannot say that the Russian Orthodox Church introduces regulations for businessmen to follow. Meanwhile, some of the Charter authors want to develop ten precepts for governmental officials as well. * **Here are the ten regulations that the All-Russian Orthodox Council has developed for Russian businessmen. * 1. Remember the spiritual meaning of life while earning the daily bread. Take care of the welfare of other people, the nation and the country when seeking personal welfare. 2. Wealth is not end in itself. It must serve for creation of good life of any individual and the nation. 3. The culture of business relations and adherence to promises help people become better and improve economy. 4. A human being is not a continuously working mechanism: he needs time for relaxation, spiritual life and creative progress. 5. The government, society and business must join their efforts to take care of good life of workers and especially of those who cannot earn their living. Management is a responsible activity. 6. Work should not kill and cripple people. 7. The political authority and the economic authority must be separated. Interference of business into politics, its effect upon the public opinion must be transparent only. Corrupt people and other criminals cannot be allowed to economy. 8. A man violates the moral law, causes damage to the society and to himself when he misappropriates other people's property, disregards the common property, does not pay to his employees or deceives partners. 9. Lies and insulting, exploitation of vices and instincts are inadmissible in competitive activity. 10. Businessmen must respect the institution of property, the right for ownership and for management of property. It is immoral to envy other people's well-being and encroach upon other people's property. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 19:48:32 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:48:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism In-Reply-To: <8CA534D7C4660A9-1150-1792@webmail-nc19.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA534D7C4660A9-1150-1792@webmail-nc19.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803131448.33001.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 13 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > The theory of evolution has stand the test of time. You want to have > free will to maximize your behavior? Show me the evidence that free > will can do that without thoughts of morality, responsibility and a > permanent being. Your other comments indicate to me that you think I think free will is some sort of mystical force beyond the nature of the self, but instead I think it is completely tied up instead with the anthropic principle, which is something that you cannot deal with quantum mechanics yet unless you are willing to descend down the dark side of the force into MWI. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 13 19:37:36 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:37:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: <20080313123736.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.7322d05527.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 20:14:46 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:14:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <20080313123736.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.7322d05527.wbe@email.secureserver.net> References: <20080313123736.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.7322d05527.wbe@email.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <200803131514.46762.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 13 March 2008, kevin at kevinfreels.com wrote: > This is what happens when millions of people scream "do something" > when there is really nothing that can be done without fully > trampeling our rights. You forgot to ask for "the right to not be called a terrorist." - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 13 21:31:28 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:31:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Compatibilism or symbiosis? re: Free Will vs. Determinism Message-ID: <8CA5368BB371006-E04-93D@webmail-da14.sysops.aol.com> "From Stanford dictionary: "Compatibilism offers a solution to the free will problem. This philosophical problem concerns a disputed incompatibility between free will and determinism. Compatibilism is the thesis that free will is compatible with determinism. Because free will is taken to be a necessary condition of moral responsibility, compatibilism is sometimes expressed in terms of a compatibility between moral responsibility and determinism." ____________ Morality is relative, just another man made concept. In nature, there is symbiosis seen as a compatible process between some microorganisms in the organic world or electrochemical interactions in the quantum world. The behavior of the mind depends on both or either of the two world processes {genes and environment}. There is no such thing as "Free Will" between electrons and neurons in the brain. Going with the above definition, humans invented thoughts of free will which is a condition necessary for moral responsibility but morality cannot be found or owned. Terry {Secular humanist/atheist} From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 21:38:44 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:38:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] New documentary by Ben Stein, "Expelled" Message-ID: <2d6187670803131438i7949a69aj5a23b39263198112@mail.gmail.com> This is a new documentary by Ben Stein that examines academic freedom in regard to evolution. http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 21:51:48 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:51:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Compatibilism or symbiosis? re: Free Will vs. Determinism In-Reply-To: <8CA5368BB371006-E04-93D@webmail-da14.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5368BB371006-E04-93D@webmail-da14.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803131651.48158.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 13 March 2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Morality is relative, just another man made concept. In nature, there "Just" another man made concept? Tell me, what else do we have to work with? Divine inspiration? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 13 22:03:57 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:03:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism Message-ID: <8CA536D454A264E-E04-AC3@webmail-da14.sysops.aol.com> Bryan: 'Funny, my neurons process virtually all my conciousness but none of them are concious of anything at all. You seem to agree that consciousness is not some magical sauce, right?" ______________ Neurons/brain cells alone do not process consciousness/awareness. The complex brain processes are inter-dependent on the different structure/physiology of the entire nervous system [spinal cord/nerves and brain} plus the other organ system functions i.e. circulatory and respiratory system wherein the failure of one system impacts the entire organism's consciousness. These factors determine the nature of your being. No free will or magical sauce there. Terry From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 13 22:33:47 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:33:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] New documentary by Ben Stein, "Expelled" In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803131438i7949a69aj5a23b39263198112@mail.gmail.co m> References: <2d6187670803131438i7949a69aj5a23b39263198112@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080313173246.024f89e0@satx.rr.com> The deep scientific thoughts of Richard Nixon's speechwriter. Gee, just what we all need. From pharos at gmail.com Thu Mar 13 23:53:42 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:53:42 +0000 Subject: [ExI] New documentary by Ben Stein, "Expelled" In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080313173246.024f89e0@satx.rr.com> References: <2d6187670803131438i7949a69aj5a23b39263198112@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080313173246.024f89e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > The deep scientific thoughts of Richard Nixon's speechwriter. Gee, > just what we all need. > The film is not officially released yet, so the usual film review sites haven't reviewed it yet. One of the first available, from the Orlando Sentinel, is here: Quotes: Is Ben Stein the new face of Creationism? It's a movie that uses animation, archival documentary footage, interviews with outraged "people of science" who want ID on the table, and "atheists" (scientists) who see all this as a step backward, all freighted to back up the argument that it stifled "freedom" when you refuse to consider the work of a supernatural being in America's science classes. ID is "creation science" is "creationism" is "God dun it." Teaching that as something provable beyond faith in a science curriculum is a big reason future Nobel winners will pour out of China and India, and not Kansas. Or Florida. That's the reason a consensus of the world's scientists fret so much over the time they have to waste on this non-debate. Stein found a Pole and the infamous Discovery Institute to back up his attacks, even though they offer no counter theories that they can back up. Expelled makes good points about academic freedom and the ways unpopular ideas are shouted down in academia, the press and the culture. But not offering evidence to back your side, where the burden of proof lies, makes the movie every bit as meaningless and silly as that transcendental metaphysical hooey of a couple of years back, What the Bleep Do We Know? ================ BillK From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 14 00:18:51 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:18:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Conflicting thoughts {compatibilism?} Message-ID: <8CA53801D160A58-13A0-6AF@webmail-nc10.sysops.aol.com> Lee: "The "compatibilist position" which I endorse says that free will and determinism are not really in conflict. To me, it ought rightly said that if one makes choices then one has free will. Obversely, one of us will be said to not have free will if he is being compelled, and is "not free" to make his choices." ____________ In science, there is no attachment to thoughts, views or theories without evidence or proof that works. Theories of evolution and quantum mechanics are tested by independent studies to see if it produce the same result. Conflicting thoughts of free will and determinism are incompatible because the former has no proof of existence whereas the latter is proven by the laws of nature and the evidence of evolution {genes}. Thoughts are processes with no permanent nature. Choices depend on feelings or thoughts of a self-centered ego, psychologically speaking, a desire to escape suffering. It is neither compulsion nor free will. Terry From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 14 06:56:39 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:56:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] New documentary by Ben Stein, "Expelled" References: <2d6187670803131438i7949a69aj5a23b39263198112@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080313173246.024f89e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <007b01c885a0$ea476c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> BillK writes > One of the first available, from the Orlando Sentinel, is here: > > > Quotes: > Is Ben Stein the new face of Creationism? > ... > ID is "creation science" is "creationism" is "God dun it." Teaching > that as something provable beyond faith in a science curriculum is a > big reason future Nobel winners will pour out of China and India, and > not Kansas. Or Florida. That's the reason a consensus of the world's > scientists fret so much over the time they have to waste on this > non-debate. Stein found a Pole and the infamous Discovery Institute to > back up his attacks, even though they offer no counter theories that > they can back up. What would be the effect of Ben Stein having substituted "round Earth theory" for "evolution" and "Flat Earth theory" for creation science? Or vice-versa? Surely, as mathematicians would say, there should be some invariants here. "Should" as in "highly desirable" or "expected". An appeal to principle if you will. > "Expelled" makes good points about academic freedom and the ways > unpopular ideas are shouted down in academia, the press and the > culture. It does. But no one is going to prison in the West yet for saying anything, even denying climate change or saying that the Holocaust never happened. (Europe is not quite so lucky.) Here is the *real* problem. The problem comes down to who gets to make decisions, and who is affected by them. Is it really proper for a tax-payer supported public institution to take sides in a scientific/philosophic controversy? "Oh yes," I'll hear almost everyone on this list say. "Since the government is necessary to decide everything, it's all okay so long as we go with the majority rule. Right now the Bush administration gets to decide what science is done, and by this time next year some other administration will decide---the people will have spoken. What could be fairer and better than that?" The short answer: Please go read Thomas Sowell's "Knowledge and Decisions". At a private university, you see, there is no problem! A professor has the right to say anything he likes, even that 2+2 = 5 according to his latest theories. But the university also has the right to dismiss him for any reason they like---their customers (paying students and their parents) just might not think that the university is doing its job. So if Bob Jones university wants to teach creationism, I say fine. And if Harvard with its billions and billions wants to teach evolution, I say fine. IT IS NOT UP TO YOU AND ME TO SAY! But no, totally ignoring the NAP (who here even remembers that?), the government goes around and confiscates huge amounts of money for---for what? to defend the very system of free government? to administer justice and enforce contracts? to maintain infrastructure that business may not be able to cooperate on? Dream on! Those were the old days. Our New Model Government is composed of people who are so wise they can, for example, know so much about some tiny town in Appalachia---its people, its customs, its traditions, how strongly the parents and children feel, what the consequences of various courses of action would be, and so on and on---that they can know whether or not school prayer should be permitted in the schools there. "Why not?", again I hear most people on this list say, "After all, God doesn't exist and so the people's money shouldn't be spent supporting that!" Whose money? Whose money? Money belonging to the people in that small town? Of course not. The money comes from all over the U.S., and government bureaucrats amass immense power by deciding who gets how much of it. But this is all good and fair, you see, because we vote on it, we get to vote on who will have all that power, so it's okay. Lee From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 14 13:34:12 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:04:12 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls Message-ID: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> Hi all, In a discussion I was having today, the topic of the evolutionary basis of early rising vs late rising behaviour came up (you know, as it does). There is evidence that tending toward early rising vs late rising is strongly genetically determined [1] [2]. Also, it looks like there might be personality differences between these early people and late people [3]. One person put forward the theory that we might have evolved these differences in the past so that there would always be someone awake in a tribe. But that's got two problems; one, there still seems to be a significant gap in the night (very few people are awake between 3 and 4), and two, it assumes group selection, which is pretty much always a poor idea. I tried to think of a good individual selection oriented explanation, came up blank. If you have an imbalance between early people and late people in a group, what is the individual selection pressure that rectifies this, making it an ESS? Anyone got any ideas on this? [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2996364.stm [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12841365 [3] http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/primarysources?wtID=33.3czt.11.3lcx (scroll down for "How you sleep is who you are") -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From xuenay at gmail.com Fri Mar 14 14:10:51 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:10:51 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> On 3/14/08, Emlyn wrote: > One person put forward the theory that we might have evolved these > differences in the past so that there would always be someone awake in > a tribe. But that's got two problems; one, there still seems to be a > significant gap in the night (very few people are awake between 3 and > 4), and two, it assumes group selection, which is pretty much always a > poor idea. You don't necessarily need to assume group selection for that explanation, though you have to formulate it a bit differently. Instead of the purpose being to defend against outside threats, there might be an advantage in being awake at a different time than the others, when there's less competition. Though I can't, from the top of my head, come up with anything that you'd be competing for that you could achieve when the others were sleeping (I momentarily thought about hunting, but I've understood that the spoils of hunting were mostly shared anyway. Maybe after agriculture was developed and things got less egalitarian). I'm also not sure about whether or not there really are *that* few people who are awake around 3 and 4... I know many people who would be, if society didn't force them to avoid it. (Me often included.) Then again, it's also possible that there's no particular explanation and it's just coincidence. Be careful about looking for evolutionary explanations for everything, for not everything has one. :-) -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From painlord2k at yahoo.it Fri Mar 14 14:23:14 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:23:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47DA8A52.9020607@yahoo.it> Amara Graps ha scritto: > The news at Boing Boing today that the US federal government thinks that > 1 in 300 US residents are terrorists: > > http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/13/1-in-300-us-resident.html > > "September 2007 report by the Inspector General of the Department of > Justice, which reported that the Terrorist Screening Center had over > 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007, and that the list was > growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month.As of today, the > list stands at approximately 917,000 names." > > reminded me how scarily out-of-control and out-of-touch with reality is > the Bush administration, with no end in sight (I'm not sure the Congress > after the Fall elections will be any better). Since 1 in 300 of US citizens > are considered terrorists, a good question is how to get all of those > bomb-throwing lunatics locked up? The usual (statist) answer is to throw > more money into the black pot, with the usual source of money being you > and me. > > Feel safer now? I don't understand. Where did they write that the 700.000 names are all from U.S. citizens? I suppose they are interested in domestic and foreign terrorists. Where did they write that any single name refer to a single person? Usually terrorists and common criminals have alias and different spelling of their names (mainly the foreign ones). Where did they write that any and all persons in the database are terrorists? Is in a database about terrorists appropriate to insert the names of the family members of suspected terrorists? The names of criminal know to work with terrorists or that have skill useful to terrorists? The name of suspected or of people connected directly or indirectly to terrorism and terrorists? The real worry is about how the database is used. If being inside the DB is enough to prevent people to board an airplane, this is stupid more than it is wrong. Simply because they are too much false positive and following all of them is a waste of resources better used for other, more useful, purposes. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 14 15:55:40 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:55:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] news: an incestuous couple with children Message-ID: <2d6187670803140855y44f3eddci773a20633c256caf@mail.gmail.com> On CNN they have a news clip about a German brother and sister who are married to each other and have four children. Two of their four children were born with serious handicaps! The husband has already spent several years in prison due to the situation and is now facing even more incarceration time. German courts felt the key factor against them was that the odds of birth defects are much higher with sibling marriages and so it must not go unpunished. I wondered why the incest taboo had not been present in their relationship but it turns out they did not grow up together (I suspect they came from a very troubled family background, which compounded the odds of all this happening). I suppose their marriage might have been legally acceptable if they had both been surgically sterilized before their wedding day. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/03/13/pleitgen.incest.illegal.cnn What would the ancient Egyptians say? lol I admit to thinking back to the past German obsession with eugenics laws as I saw the goofy looking German genetics professor speak. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 14 16:04:28 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:04:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. Message-ID: <8CA540437153597-11C8-A65@webmail-nc16.sysops.aol.com> "One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important > one, is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many > others---should instruct us about what actions to take and what > decisions to make." ______________ The problem of philosophy in general is it's subjective nature prescribing some treatment{ a thought/idea} to view objective reality/truth. What is truth? Asking that question is already a mistake. > and> > Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and > what I can expect the different outcomes to be like." _____________ Probability connotes random chance. Scientific theories are put to test {an objective process}. How do you test if the mind is a behavior of the brain? This is when the observer is the observed. Terry From aiguy at comcast.net Fri Mar 14 16:14:04 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:14:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <47DA8A52.9020607@yahoo.it> References: <47DA8A52.9020607@yahoo.it> Message-ID: <004101c885ee$6d2b15f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Amara Graps ha scritto: > The news at Boing Boing today that the US federal government thinks > that > 1 in 300 US residents are terrorists: > > http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/13/1-in-300-us-resident.html > > "September 2007 report by the Inspector General of the Department of > Justice, which reported that the Terrorist Screening Center had over > 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007, and that the list was > growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month.As of today, > the list stands at approximately 917,000 names." > I think the folks at Boing Boing are jumping to conclusions. Just because your name comes up on a watch list does not make you a terrorist. The Department of Homeland security is using data mining techniques to identify persons of interest. So lets say that there are 1000 real terrorists identified in the country today from solid sources like Alquida documents captured in Iraq raids. By monitoring the phone records of the people they call and the people that call them the list gets much bigger. Obviously not all those people they call or who call them are terrorists. But if a person who calls them then calls three other people who are also on the list of known terrorists then the probability that they are involved in a terror cell increases dramatically. Cross reference these lists with the list of people who have overstayed after Visa expiration and you now have the means of locating and deporting potential unfriendlies who have already violated our laws by not complying with the terms of their being here. Obviously homeland security does not have enough resources to monitor 700,000 people who come up on call lists but I am sure there is a weighting algorithm where by the more times you call a terrorist and the more terrorists you call the higher their level of interest in you becomes. So what if we're all on this list and they have Carnivore monitoring our voice and data. As long as we are not consorting with known terrorists, talking consistently about bombs, Jihad, drugs (Narcoterrorism), Bin Ladin, etc... Then the Men in Black will never show up at our door. If this type or surveillance helps identify terror cells, sleeper cells, white supremacist arm stockpiles, etc... and a minimum of innocent civilians don't get their doors busted down by mistake then I think this is a good thing. It shows that the government is trying to use the same data mining software that businesses use to be more effective and make us safer. From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 14 17:28:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:28:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <004101c885ee$6d2b15f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <47DA8A52.9020607@yahoo.it> <004101c885ee$6d2b15f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <200803141228.54745.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 14 March 2008, Gary Miller wrote: > Just because your name comes up on a watch list does not make you a > terrorist. **We** know that. Do they? Many people fail in basic reasoning. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 14 17:31:33 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:31:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. In-Reply-To: <8CA540437153597-11C8-A65@webmail-nc16.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA540437153597-11C8-A65@webmail-nc16.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:04 AM, wrote: > The problem of philosophy in general is it's subjective nature > prescribing some treatment{ a thought/idea} to view objective > reality/truth. What is truth? Asking that question is already a mistake. > > > and> > > Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and > > what I can expect the different outcomes to be like." > _____________ > > Probability connotes random chance. Scientific theories are put to test > {an objective process}. How do you test if the mind is a behavior of > the brain? This is when the observer is the observed. Wow, far-out! I mean, totally. - Jef From brian at posthuman.com Fri Mar 14 17:34:20 2008 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:34:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> Kaj Sotala wrote: > > others, when there's less competition. Though I can't, from the top of > my head, come up with anything that you'd be competing for that you > could achieve when the others were sleeping (I momentarily thought Haven't you heard, nightfolk get more ... er, fun. ;-) -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From aiguy at comcast.net Fri Mar 14 20:18:21 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:18:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <200803141228.54745.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <47DA8A52.9020607@yahoo.it><004101c885ee$6d2b15f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <200803141228.54745.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <008801c88610$8ed176f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> On Friday 14 March 2008, Gary Miller wrote: > Just because your name comes up on a watch list does not make you a > terrorist. Brian asked: >> **We** know that. Do they? Many people fail in basic reasoning. That is correct but since such databases are both classified and protected by presumably the best security our tax dollars can buy. And because they are only accessable by trained intelligence analysts who are basing their investigative recommendations upon frequency/severity algorithms designed by them to allow their limited investigative staff to concentrate on the most likely and most serious threats. I don't think being on that list with a low Threat Potential Index (TPI) is going to impact our lives in anyway imaginable. From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Fri Mar 14 23:15:51 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:15:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > I tried to think of a good individual selection oriented explanation, > came up blank. If you have an imbalance between early people and late > people in a group, what is the individual selection pressure that > rectifies this, making it an ESS? Anyone got any ideas on this? > > [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2996364.stm > [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12841365 > [3] > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/primarysources?wtID=33.3czt.11.3lcx > (scroll down for "How you sleep is who you are") Well according to the article linked to in The Atlantic: ------------ "Social behavior diverges as well: Morning people are more likely to be self-controlled and exhibit ?upstanding? conduct; they respect authority, are more formal, and take greater pains to make a good impression. (Earlier research also suggests that they are less likely to hold radical political opinions.) Evening people, by contrast, are ?independent? and ?nonconforming,? and more reluctant to listen to authority?which suggests that teachers may have several reasons to prefer those students who wake up in time for class." ---------- Based on this, I would half-jokingly suggest that night owls who were up after the alpha male had gone to sleep could have sex without getting beaten up for it. And the evolutionary advantage of that is self-evident. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 14 23:45:58 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:45:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Free Will vs. Determinism Message-ID: <8CA5444AFB0F3B8-1588-140A@webmail-nd18.sysops.aol.com> Kevin: "I think one mistake to make on this question is to suppose that it's a metaphysical (or, in some contexts, religious) question. The problem of free will isn't going to be solved by armchair speculation. Rather, it's a scientific question: the question being, how do we explain human volition? It's a problem of neuroscience and what we need is a lot research in how the brain works. ________ Its not a scientific question but a mistake in thinking that free will exist. Kevin: "But, we can at least define the problem. At any moment, we can conceive multiple courses of action that we can take, yet we only actually *take* one of them. What determines our chosen course of action?" ___________ Genes determine one's nature/behavior in response to environmental stimuli. It determines the brain structure, the color of your skin, eyes and your sex from birth. Religion invented the idea of free will to factor in ideas of sin and immorality. It is a thought on top of thoughts. Kevin: "is our volition or will that determines our course of action really isn't sufficient, because volition isn't a clear and distinct idea. Rather, it is at best a placeholder for an explanation: it's a word we use to signify an explanation that is missing. The free will problem can be summed up as the question: what exactly is the will?" ____________ "Will" denotes some state of being in the future. The problem is who knows what the future Is? If no one knows the future, why cling to the thought of a free being? No one is neither free nor not free. Terry {Zen Practitioner} From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 00:00:55 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:30:55 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803141700g76117778t79790c05aec54090@mail.gmail.com> On 15/03/2008, Kaj Sotala wrote: > Then again, it's also possible that there's no particular explanation > and it's just coincidence. Be careful about looking for evolutionary > explanations for everything, for not everything has one. :-) I agree, regarding not everything having an evolutionary explanation. In this case though, there are genes explicitly controlling the behaviour, which does want such an explanation. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 00:16:09 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:46:09 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> On 15/03/2008, The Avantguardian wrote: > --- Emlyn wrote: > > > I tried to think of a good individual selection oriented explanation, > > came up blank. If you have an imbalance between early people and late > > people in a group, what is the individual selection pressure that > > rectifies this, making it an ESS? Anyone got any ideas on this? > > > > [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2996364.stm > > [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12841365 > > [3] > > > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/primarysources?wtID=33.3czt.11.3lcx > > (scroll down for "How you sleep is who you are") > > Well according to the article linked to in The Atlantic: > ------------ > "Social behavior diverges as well: Morning people are more likely to be > self-controlled and exhibit "upstanding" conduct; they respect > authority, are more formal, and take greater pains to make a good > impression. (Earlier research also suggests that they are less likely > to hold radical political opinions.) Evening people, by contrast, are > "independent" and "nonconforming," and more reluctant to listen to > authority?which suggests that teachers may have several reasons to > prefer those students who wake up in time for class." > ---------- > Based on this, I would half-jokingly suggest that night owls who were > up after the alpha male had gone to sleep could have sex without > getting beaten up for it. And the evolutionary advantage of that is > self-evident. Now, there's a start! If we posit the early rising group as the defacto situation (I'll address that below), we could say that late risers do this to be slightly out of sync with the early group, avoid the power structure of the group, and thus, yes, get more (as Brian said, lmao). That kind of slight tendency in some genes could be self supporting, and tend toward creating a sub group, the genes from late group not mixing so much with the early group. This then begs the question, why is the early group the default? It seems to me that the early rising times better match the daylight hours. So straight thinking, logical types would find that the most useful time to be awake, I guess. The early risers are the people that attend to the day to day business of life, absolutely necessary, but hard to think deeply around because deep thinking looks like idleness. So, the late group attracts the deep and weird thinkers, who need mental time away from the early group. It looks like that's where you start to get a weak separation of genes into Early Riser+Straight Thinker vs Late Riser+Bendy Thinker. Not fully coherent, but that's shaping up as something. Anyone got something more / different? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 00:18:35 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:48:35 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803141718y62027114i6e53fe473a30859@mail.gmail.com> On 15/03/2008, Emlyn wrote: > On 15/03/2008, The Avantguardian wrote: > > --- Emlyn wrote: > > > > > I tried to think of a good individual selection oriented explanation, > > > came up blank. If you have an imbalance between early people and late > > > people in a group, what is the individual selection pressure that > > > rectifies this, making it an ESS? Anyone got any ideas on this? > > > > > > [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2996364.stm > > > [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12841365 > > > [3] > > > > > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/primarysources?wtID=33.3czt.11.3lcx > > > (scroll down for "How you sleep is who you are") > > > > Well according to the article linked to in The Atlantic: > > ------------ > > "Social behavior diverges as well: Morning people are more likely to be > > self-controlled and exhibit "upstanding" conduct; they respect > > authority, are more formal, and take greater pains to make a good > > impression. (Earlier research also suggests that they are less likely > > to hold radical political opinions.) Evening people, by contrast, are > > "independent" and "nonconforming," and more reluctant to listen to > > authority?which suggests that teachers may have several reasons to > > prefer those students who wake up in time for class." > > ---------- > > Based on this, I would half-jokingly suggest that night owls who were > > up after the alpha male had gone to sleep could have sex without > > getting beaten up for it. And the evolutionary advantage of that is > > self-evident. > > Now, there's a start! If we posit the early rising group as the > defacto situation (I'll address that below), we could say that late > risers do this to be slightly out of sync with the early group, avoid > the power structure of the group, and thus, yes, get more (as Brian > said, lmao). That kind of slight tendency in some genes could be self > supporting, and tend toward creating a sub group, the genes from late > group not mixing so much with the early group. > > This then begs the question, why is the early group the default? It > seems to me that the early rising times better match the daylight > hours. So straight thinking, logical types would find that the most > useful time to be awake, I guess. > > The early risers are the people that attend to the day to day business > of life, absolutely necessary, but hard to think deeply around because > deep thinking looks like idleness. So, the late group attracts the > deep and weird thinkers, who need mental time away from the early > group. It looks like that's where you start to get a weak separation > of genes into Early Riser+Straight Thinker vs Late Riser+Bendy > Thinker. > > Not fully coherent, but that's shaping up as something. Anyone got > something more / different? Oh, a possible competing explanation? The differences come from some far historical racial mixing, of two separate groups who already had these seperate tendencies. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 15 00:21:55 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:21:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Compatibilism re: Free Will vs. Determinism Message-ID: <8CA5449B556DFDF-1588-15B6@webmail-nd18.sysops.aol.com> "> Morality is relative, just another man made concept. In nature, there "Just" another man made concept? Tell me, what else do we have to work with? Divine inspiration? - Bryan ___________ Concepts/ thoughts come and go why cling to them as if they have divine power? Work with awareness/consciousness with critical thinking and mindfulness. When you drive focus on driving instead of talking to your cell phone for instance. Free will and determinism is like mixing oil and water, no compatibility there too. Terry From xuenay at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 00:22:24 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 02:22:24 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803141700g76117778t79790c05aec54090@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0803141700g76117778t79790c05aec54090@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803141722y6f193f05y3d3619fcb4a2d067@mail.gmail.com> On 3/15/08, Emlyn wrote: > I agree, regarding not everything having an evolutionary explanation. > In this case though, there are genes explicitly controlling the > behaviour, which does want such an explanation. Genetic drift? -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From xuenay at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 00:45:39 2008 From: xuenay at gmail.com (Kaj Sotala) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 02:45:39 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <6a13bb8f0803141722y6f193f05y3d3619fcb4a2d067@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0803141700g76117778t79790c05aec54090@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803141722y6f193f05y3d3619fcb4a2d067@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6a13bb8f0803141745j30e427c8h8add75d6dcecd692@mail.gmail.com> On 3/15/08, Kaj Sotala wrote: > On 3/15/08, Emlyn wrote: > > I agree, regarding not everything having an evolutionary explanation. > > In this case though, there are genes explicitly controlling the > > behaviour, which does want such an explanation. > > Genetic drift? Also - eye color, hair color, and blood type are explictly controlled by genes. With the possible exception of blood type (not entirely sure about that one), I don't think differences in any of them have any particular evolutionary reason. -- http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/ Organizations worth your time: http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/ From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 15 01:29:51 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:29:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.co m> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> At 10:46 AM 3/15/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >That kind of slight tendency in some genes could be self >supporting, and tend toward creating a sub group, the genes from late >group not mixing so much with the early group. The point about the sneaky fuckers (I think this sort of assumes you're talking mostly about the males) is that their genes are being scattered among *all* the women of the tribe, no? Or is it self-reinforcing in that night owl women are preferentially still up and about when night owl men are... up? Damien Broderick From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 03:19:36 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:49:36 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> On 15/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:46 AM 3/15/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > > >That kind of slight tendency in some genes could be self > >supporting, and tend toward creating a sub group, the genes from late > >group not mixing so much with the early group. > > The point about the sneaky fuckers (I think this sort of assumes > you're talking mostly about the males) is that their genes are being > scattered among *all* the women of the tribe, no? Or is it > self-reinforcing in that night owl women are preferentially still up > and about when night owl men are... up? > > Damien Broderick Yep, night owl men and women are up, in the Benny Hill sense, at the same time. No gender bias here, I think. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 15 03:39:38 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:39:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the Mind References: <026b01c88455$346f86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <00e401c8864e$47eca000$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jef writes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jef Allbright" Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:21 AM > Lee wrote: > >> One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the most important >> one, is be prescriptive. Philosophy most vitally---for me and for many >> others---should instruct us about what actions to take and what >> decisions to make. >> ... >> Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and >> what I can expect the different outcomes to be like. > > My interest in philosophy is pragmatic, but our key difference is that > I emphasize the importance of awareness of an always broader (and > ultimately uncertain) context, while you characteristically use terms > like "the simple truth" That's almost totally false. I emphasize---and have emphasized ever since 1972 Eternal Truth No. 1: "Nothing is simple". If I have used that phrase, "the simple truth is..." and I probably have, it is as a figure of speech, nothing more. E.g., I wanted suggest a simpler conjecture than the proposed one or the one under discussion. > and strive to convey models in "objective" terms. You're dead on there! :-) Please criticize this further, if you'd like to, and have the time. > I emphasize the importance of increasing coherence over increasing context. > You demonstrate that coherence tends naturally to increase inversely > with context. Interesting. I admit that coherence *does* naturally tend to decrease with increasing context. (That's one reason for Eternal Truth No. 1.) But your goal---if that's not too strong a word---of increasing coherence along with (or "over") context sounds praiseworthy. > Note that coherence applies only to the map, not the territory. I think I understand you. I agree with this: "the territory" is reality and can't properly be deemed coherent or incoherent, though I do steadfastly maintain that the "the territory" (i.e. reality) is not simple. I concede that "simple" here does drag in epistemological concerns, part of your main point here, I think. > Within a fully defined context (Peano arithmetic, predicate logic, > basic game theory...), your approach is beyond reproach. However, > within an increasingly uncertain context -- as we find ourselves to be > as necessarily subjective agents within a world of accelerating change > -- our emphasis should shift away from hopes of an increasingly > accurate model of expected consequences, toward increasing effective > modeling in principle (to be applied at each moment of decision.) A provocative claim. I admit to striving vigorously---so long as it is possible ---for increasingly accurate models. I think that that's more or less the paradigm of science. Think so? Anyway, I'm not really sure of the fine point you appear to be making about the difference, i.e., striving towards increasingly effective modeling instead of striving for increasingly accurate models. (And pardon me, sincerely, if I have misrepresented you there.) [Pseudo-nasty ponder: Could Jef continue to write consistently, coherently, and understandably if he were forbidden use of the word "increasingly"? Would, or could he ever find paraphrases or synonyms?] > The game itself is evolving (it always was, but we hadn't really > noticed) and it's becoming increasingly important not only to act > effectively, but to adapt increasingly effectively in order to act > increasingly effectively. Wash, rinse, repeat. I.e., to adapt with increasing effectiveness. I agree, if you mean that things are changing more and more quickly culturally, scientifically, technologically and so on. Yes. >> And so I prefer to pose situations that call for decisions, for >> actions. > > The first several years of my professional life I was a successful, > even gifted, troubleshooter of scientific instruments.... > > ...And I found that some of my most talented engineers were blind > to the importance of context. Some would brilliantly address > electro-mechanical problems within the equipment but fail to perceive > the importance of the environment of the lab (temperature, humidity, > vibration, fluctuating power or ground loops...) Most did recognize > the importance of the *physical* environment but then failed to > recognize that the customer doesn't really care about the equipment, > but rather the technical solutions they provide. Very few realized > that in the larger context both equipment and solutions were > subordinate to the customer's (mere) perception. Thanks, a good anecdote with an important point. > The point here is that the hard-core engineer was typically set firmly > in his belief that he was acting most decisively in optimizing > objective performance of the instrument. Anything else was > wishy-washy, vague and abstract. But I would much rather have (and > pay) engineers whose primary value was to achieve customer > satisfaction, and would then act (including optimizing technical > solutions and equipment performance) as appropriate. Yes, just so. I do find some resonance between what you are saying with the way that people tend to apply abstract principles at the expense of recognizing the requirements of real, practical situations. The Libertarians are a beautiful case in point. Like Ayn Rand before them (but gratefully not quite so extreme, most of them) they would settle on certain *principles* and completely ignore context. As I have said before, their writings often seem to assume that every human being is a white, middle-class individualist in the American tradition. In exasperation, I would sometimes wonder just how much they'd read about other people, other races, and other cultures. (Sorry for the digression.) >> Otherwise, the terminological confusions and irreconcilable >> philosophies may be simply moot. > > > >> But unless you delineate very exact, sharp *decisions* and >> *actions* in scenarios that serve to distinguish your beliefs >> from everyone else---and put less emphasis on the abstract >> hard-to-follow verbiage---then you won't be facing up to >> the true challenge, namely, prescribing courses of action. > > Lee, you discovered many years ago that, contrary to popular > individual and cultural biases, it is incoherent to conceive of > personal identity as dependent on any particular physical embodiment, > nor any "discrete trajectory" of its constituent particles or > processes, nor any requirement of a discrete self, tangible or not. Well, yes, but that's putting it a bit too strongly. Some people indeed can consistently and ingeniously defend identity as dependent on a particular physical embodiment, and other defend other variations we oppose. I surmise that the cost is really only a certain amount of "awkwardness", or perhaps having to defend sentences whose words contrast starkly with the words' usual meanings. > In short, you arrived at a functionalist account of personal identity > defined in terms of a particular (dynamic) pattern of information. > > Your model is an improvement, coherent and extensible over a context > broader than common-sense, and all the more satisfying and seductive > since it appears to offer newfound potential for extended survival of > the self. Thank you. :-) > Your view posits exact identity of duplicates at T=0, with identity > then diminishing as some function of diverging pattern/functional > similarity due to accumulating change brought about by separate paths > of interaction with the world. This is delightful, because it means > (with logical certainty) that sufficiently (?) similar copies, > regardless of displacement in place or time, must be considered > (existing/surviving) identical persons. Ahem, I thought it was nice too :-) > But just as the popular common-sense view fails when extended while > yours succeeds, your view fails when extended only to be superseded > by a model coherent within an even broader context. That could be possible! Although, again, "fails" is too strong a word. At most, I can be forced to support certain awkward conclusions. For example, since 1981 I've been at loggerheads with myself over whether a succession of frozen states can be conscious. A friend and I thought that we solved it in 1988. But the solution was, and is, costly: there are several questions which are exceedingly difficult for me to field. But all I can say, even after my pathetic plea at the end of www.leecorbin.com/FSF.html is "can anyone help?". > Because personal identity is not a property of any object. > Personal identity is entirely a function of the observer. Even > when the subject *is* the observer. Naturally, I hotly dispute both those claims, as you know. > And personal identity based on pattern/function similarity is merely a > narrow special case of personal identity based on perceived agency. Which I also think---at this time---to be not far short of nonsense. > Personal identity based on perceived agency encompasses and > accommodates the preservation of identity over the lifetime of a > person, regardless of any degree of physical/functional change > due to aging, disfigurement, body-morphing or enhancement, > memory-alteration,...to the extent that the agent is perceived as > acting on behalf of a particular entity. I do remember our earlier discussions concerning this point, though not as well as I would like. > Personal identity based on perceived agency allows for special-purpose > replicants, each a valid instance of "self" to the extent that they > act as an agent of a particular entity, regardless of physical (or > virtual) form or function. > > Personal identity based on perceived agency resolves the obvious and > immediate paradox of self in direct conflict with self, for instance as a > consequence of duplicates stepping out of the duplication machine > with both intent on control/enjoyment of the same property, spouse, > etc. > > Personal identity based on perceived agency accommodates the full > range of moral/legal/social responsibility and is extensible, without > the obvious contradictions of a pattern/functional similarity where, > for instance Lee1 is held responsible for the violent actions of his > near duplicate Lee2 who went a little crazy while working out in the > asteroid mines. [Of course, I retort that our laws must evolve to > rationally deal with the reality here---we easily see in your not- > very-good example that there was an explanation for Lee2's > behavior, and that it seems very questionable to try to "blame" > Lee1 for any of it.] > > Of course this has all been discussed before and in more detail, > available in the archives. Yes it has. But that review was good. That's why I didn't snip it in this reply. > So Lee, a theory of personal identity more coherent over greater > context is available to you. But as the believer in the popular > common-sense view must give up an attachment to belief in a discrete > self, you must give up an attachment to belief in an ontological self. Never! I'll die first. (Literally.) But of course :-) , I really am open to criticism and even crave it, and so my mind is open, (or at least as open as most of us are capable of so-imagining our minds to be). > And everything will be just the same, but with a more coherent model, > supporting more effective action. But what I still find crucially missing is that "your philosophy" perhaps makes no difference. What I mean is, what if there is no actual difference between two given philosophical theories? That, unsuspected by their proponents, the two are isomorphic given mere terminological and even slightly semantic substitutions? How does one know that doctrine A is not really just another way of saying doctrine B? As you know, the history of philosophy is littered with quite a number of entirely consequential-less arguments. Changing a coordinate system doesn't affect "the territory" at all. You seem to shy away from describing how your views would make any *practical* difference. In other words, just how does someone act if they subscribe to your view and not mine? Not coincidentally, I fear, you also shy away in many instances of giving sharp answers to sharp scenarios. And no, it won't do (as I'm sure you realize) that as a consequence people will merely judge 80 year old Aunt Mary to be a "different person" than 40 year old Aunt Mary. Who really cares what "different person" actually means unless it has consequences for how we would act, and decisions we would make? Lee P.S. Jef, thank you for the clearest post I can ever remember reading from you. It was a pleasure to follow. I never had to struggle with a sentence (well, maybe one or two) trying to conjecture what you meant. And in the cases where ambiguity did persist, you followed it up with another sentence which resolved it. Finally, you provided a very good example to *illustrate* what you were saying, giving not only me, but any reader a "warm fuzzy" that he was understanding you. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 03:45:16 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:15:16 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <6a13bb8f0803141745j30e427c8h8add75d6dcecd692@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0803141700g76117778t79790c05aec54090@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803141722y6f193f05y3d3619fcb4a2d067@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803141745j30e427c8h8add75d6dcecd692@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803142045h4017543cna4f71bc3eca8292f@mail.gmail.com> On 15/03/2008, Kaj Sotala wrote: > On 3/15/08, Kaj Sotala wrote: > > On 3/15/08, Emlyn wrote: > > > I agree, regarding not everything having an evolutionary explanation. > > > In this case though, there are genes explicitly controlling the > > > behaviour, which does want such an explanation. > > > > Genetic drift? Well, this linking between sleep cycles and personality type, seems to specific for drift. Sleep cycles might drift under no pressure, and personality type similarly, but both together? > > Also - eye color, hair color, and blood type are explictly controlled > by genes. With the possible exception of blood type (not entirely sure > about that one), I don't think differences in any of them have any > particular evolutionary reason. > Possibilities for eye & hair color: - unique sexual selection pressures in northern europe: http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(05)00059-0/abstract - An interesting discussion here, refuting some ideas: http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-are-europeans-whiter-than-north.html - And some more stuff, detail is interesting: http://neurologicalcorrelates.com/wordpress/2007/10/28/pigment-last-time-i-promise/ The conclusion I draw from this probably terribly unrepresentative sample of stuff I scratched up via google, is that the massive eye and hair color variations in north and eastern europeans must have been positively selected for (moves too decisively, and doesn't happen in other candidate populations, eg: inuit), so it's a positive pressure, not drift (which is a lack of pressure), but we don't really know what that pressure was. Also it's useful to note that it's an aberation overall, african type skin, eyes, hair is the ancestral norm. Blood Types also seem to be a poorly understood phenomenon, but here's some discussion: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2003-10/1067015749.Ge.r.html -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 15 03:51:18 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:51:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.co m> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> At 01:49 PM 3/15/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >Yep, night owl men and women are up, in the Benny Hill sense, at the >same time. No gender bias here, I think. I doubt that we know enough about the sleeping/screwing arrangements in our ancient EEAs to be sure about that). It's not as if the two moieties are completely separated by time; night owls might go to sleep and get up as much as, say, 4 or even 6 hours after the early birds (if those ducks and drakes were thoughtful and kept their chatter and song to a minimum), but they don't divide the day between them. And, horrid though it is to say, while a male probably needs to be fairly awake to get it up and in, females have been known to sleep through the operation. But that's not the main thing, either, because I'm suggesting that while the bright-eyed and bushy-tailed males are off hunting and gathering, the late riser male sneaky fuckers are sometimes whispering endearing words to the early ducks who are now getting ready for a smoko and a cuppa after their morning toil, which mixes the alleles up something chronic. I reckon this all gets too, um, hard to work out without a really good sense of the daily economies in question, whether the men and women sleep in separate lodges, if there are sacred prohibitions against fucking at certain times of the day or liturgical season or in the presence of infants at the breast, etc. Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 15 04:20:57 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:20:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. References: <8CA540437153597-11C8-A65@webmail-nc16.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <00f801c88654$9741dcf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes > [Lee wrote] [BTW why do people often omit attribution > when no clear clues exist as to the original writer?] > >> "One ultimate purpose of philosophy, and I argue the >> most important one, is [to] be prescriptive. Philosophy >> most vitally---for me and for many others---should >> instruct us about what actions to take and what >> decisions to make." > ______________ > > The problem of philosophy in general is its subjective nature > prescribing some treatment {a thought/idea} to view objective > reality/truth. Subjective? How so? The Epicureans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism said, for instance He [Epicurus] argued that when eating, one should not eat too richly, for it could lead to dissatisfaction later..., Likewise, sex could lead to increased lust and dissatisfaction with the sexual partner... There is really nothing subjective about that on my usage of terms, despite appearance at first glance. Either someone is dissatisfied or they are not (sadly, even here I have to quickly add, in order to ward off misguided criticism, that it's a continuum, of course). ...an anonymous Epicurean summed up Epicurus' philosophy on happiness in four simple lines: Don't fear god, Don't worry about death; What is good is easy to get, and What is terrible is easy to endure. Whereas the Stoics said... (etc.). > What is truth? Asking that question is already a mistake. Well, you never, never, never heard me ask any such foolish thing. >> and Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should >> take and what I can expect the different outcomes to be like." > _____________ > > Probability connotes random chance. Where the hell did that come from? To keep such things from appearing as complete non-sequiturs, could you supply a little context, or an hint as to how that applies to this? Oh! Very sorry. I now see that the subject line has to do with probability. But nothing I said had to do with probability, did it? (My own view BTW is that of an "objective Bayesian", along with E. T. Jaynes, who speaks quite objectively of one robot having certain information that requires it to calculate one probability while another robot has different information and must calculate another. Again, Jaynes quite skillfully described it all, you see, as much as he could in objective terms, side-stepping horrid quagmires of qualia, and futile talk of "subjectivity", 99% of which leads nowhere and is very distracting.) > Scientific theories are put to test {an objective process}. > How do you test if the mind is a behavior of the brain? Recall that the Germans don't even have a word for "mind". So are they just lost souls in examining these questions? No, it just means that we cannot---must not---put too much weight on any particular word. Your last sentence "How do you test if the mind is a behavior of the brain?" really ought to have been followed by one sentence starting "That is, ..." which used different terms to try to say the same thing (the acid test of whether one is thinking clearly, and possibly even a second follow-up sentence starting "In other words..." As it is, I have very, very little idea what you are asking. > This is when the observer is the observed. Sounds very profound, but until I know what you mean I have to remain non-committal. Lee P.S. Terry, sorry to be taking out on you a lot of criticism that could and should be directed at about 62.7% of the posts on this and related threads. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 15 04:47:40 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:47:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com><481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com><710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Sorry I haven't followed all the links, but what about > Emlyn wrote: > >> Yep, night owl men and women are up, in the Benny Hill sense, at the >> same time. No gender bias here, I think. and Damien replied > I doubt that we know enough about the sleeping/screwing arrangements > in our ancient EEAs to be sure about that). It's not as if the two > moieties are completely separated by time; night owls might go to > sleep and get up as much as, say, 4 or even 6 hours after the early > birds (if those ducks and drakes were thoughtful and kept their > chatter and song to a minimum), but they don't divide the day between > them. And, horrid though it is to say, while a male probably needs to > be fairly awake to get it up and in, females have been known to sleep > through the operation. But that's not the main thing, either, because > I'm suggesting that while the bright-eyed and bushy-tailed males are > off hunting and gathering, the late riser male sneaky fuckers are > sometimes whispering endearing words to the early ducks who are now > getting ready for a smoko and a cuppa after their morning toil, which > mixes the alleles up something chronic. I need to remind everyone (whether they need it or not)(as I say "I need") that developing a genetic explanation always requires a selective advantage, and since we seem to have here an equilibrium, it's that which needs to be explained too. E.g., what if there are too many early risers, how does that increase the number of viable offspring of the late risers and vice-versa. What about the possibility that personal status and power in the tribe are a factor? "Being late", whether it was getting ready for the hunt back then, or showing up at a party or at work now, is a signals disdain or at least confident independence. I can see an equilibrium arising from several sources that have been proposed. But perhaps I'm missing something: has this really been proved genetic in origin? I myself have turned from an early riser to a late one as "trust" among my fellows at work has evolved to the point that no one really much cares anymore when the others arrive. But then, if it is genetic, I'm probably an early riser (modulo sleeping problems) because of an urge to "do my duty", "support the team", etc., exactly what you would expect from a right-wing hyper-patriot team-player like me :-) Didn't mean to argue by example or anecdote, but just wanted to illustrate my questions. Thanks, Lee From amara at amara.com Sat Mar 15 14:12:03 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 08:12:03 -0600 Subject: [ExI] ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls Message-ID: Dear Emlyn: These links: >Possibilities for eye & hair color: >- unique sexual selection pressures in northern europe: >http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(05)00059-0/abstract >- An interesting discussion here, refuting some ideas: >http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-are-europeans-whiter-than-north.html >- And some more stuff, detail is interesting: >http://neurologicalcorrelates.com/wordpress/2007/10/28/pigment-last-time-i-promise/ are especially interesting to me! I'll explain why later, but I want to thank you, now, for them. And this link you gave was interesting too: "What happened in human history to make O blood dominant in our society? >http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2003-10/1067015749.Ge.r.html which gave me a clue why I get urinary tract infections so easily (my blood type is a relatively rare: AB+). Madsci writes: "It seems likely that some pathogens eventually evolved an ability to use the A and B antigens to infect cells. For example, Staphylococcus saprophyticus preferentially causes urinary tract infections in blood type A and AB women. In addition, some pathogens present these same antigens on their own cell surfaces. For example, Escherichia coli strain 086 presents the B antigen, and this antigen is readily recognized by anti-B antibodies in blood type A and O people, protecting them from infection." And did you follow up more writings from the neurologicalcorrelates blogger, regarding stem cell release?? He/she writes: "I wonder if this stem cell release has something to do with who is a night-owl and who is an early bird?" http://neurologicalcorrelates.com/wordpress/2008/03/09/stem-cells-in-our-bodies-are-released-according-to-our-body-clock-not-some-artificial-government-program-which-has-dubious-value/ Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 15 14:30:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 07:30:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Modal Realism and Leibniz: (was The Many Dimensional Sculpture) References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <019601c8835c$e7cc3990$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <012901c886a9$646ed800$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes in ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Bishop" Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:22 AM > I would not have expected an implicit connection between MWI and modal > realism per Rafal's message. However, I took this opportunity to go look at > the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_realism > and I see what you mean: > >> Modal realism is the view, notably propounded by David Lewis, that >> possible worlds are as real as the actual world. It is based on the >> following notions: that possible worlds exist; possible worlds are not >> different in kind to the actual world; possible worlds are irreducible >> entities; the term "actual" in "actual world" is indexical. As is so often the case---Singularity Be Praised---Wikipedia rises to the challenge brilliantly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possible_world Comparison with the many-worlds interpretation The concept of possible worlds has sometimes been compared with the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics; indeed, they are sometimes erroneously conflated. The many-worlds interpretation is an attempt to provide an interpretation of nondeterministic processes (such as measurement) without positing the so-called collapse of the wavefunction, while the possible-worlds theory is an attempt to provide an interpretation (in the sense of a more or less formal semantics) for modal claims. In the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, the collapse of the wavefunction is interpreted by introducing a quantum superposition of states of a possibly infinite number of identical "parallel universes", all of which exist "actually", according to some proponents. The many-worlds interpretation is silent on those questions of modality that possible-world theories address. Major differences between the two notions, aside from their origins and purposes, include: * The states of quantum-theoretical worlds are entangled quantum mechanically while entanglement for possible worlds may be meaningless; * according to a widely held orthodoxy among philosophers, there are possible worlds that are logically but not physically possible, but quantum-theoretical worlds are all physically possible. Given that both possible-world theories and quantum many-world theories are philosophically contentious, it is not surprising that the precise relations between the two are also contentious. So my guess wasn't too far off! > Hrm. I really would like to add some Leibniz in on this. How could > possibilities be as real as actualities? Let me reform my question. Is > he saying that possibilities exist in the sense of mental constructs, > such that one's lack of knowledge of the world essentially makes the > world both the 'real' and the 'possible' as you recursively explore it > and make your own representation? Alas, I'm no expert on Leibniz. Alas, I'm no beginning student of Leibniz. Alas, I hardly rate even as a complete ignoramus on Liebniz's philosophical views. But I'd be all ears for what you or others have to say. > A vague, fuzzy set of what the world may or may not be, allowing > subjective agents to explore it without messing up too much. Or is he > saying that, metaphysically, the possibilities are as real as anything else? Help. Anyone familiar with Leibniz at all on this score? > Charles S. Peirce would have something to say about this use of > the word 'possibility' since, naturally, it is more tied to the human > mind, and he really, really disliked anybody saying something was > 'possible' when they did not have the true source code to the > universe to figure out the likelihood of something occurring or > whether or not something was truly valid given whatever underlying > laws of the universe there exist (whether a cellular automata rule or > not, just so I can get in my mention of Wolfram and von Neumann etc.). So what---Peirce wanted to do to "possible" what I want to do to "qualia"? That is, prescribe enough laws forbidding its use so that the user to can be successfully prosecuted, and probably suffer sanctions, fines, and solitary confinement somewhere? > Is Lewis saying that possibilities exist (in the sense that a mental > agent can rationalize that something might be 'possible' given his > limited understanding of the greater world), or that if we allow > such 'possibilities' we automatically must acknowledge their full and > total existence? As you saw, Rafal answered > ### The way I see it, everything exists. I mean it in the hardcore > metaphysical sense - whatever it means to "be", everything you > can think of and a lot more, have this property. Even contradictions, > even inconsistent logic, even mathematical impossibilities exist, as > hard [real] as rocks, except we are not there to touch them. and that seems like maybe what Lewis was saying indeed. > I like to use Leibniz's optimism and his definitions from time to time: > 1) real - necessarily existent > 2) impossible - necessarily nonexistent > 3) possible - unnecessarily nonexistent > And a few others. I realize now that I cannot recall a link that > explains this terminology, but I do think it is still useful here since > it ties possibilities/reality/actuality back to terms re: necessity and > coherency. Thanks. Sounds useful to remember this about the views of the great Hannover genius. > [Lee wrote] >> [Rafal wrote... or was it Bryan?] >> > This form of self-correlation may be the necessary (although >> > perhaps not sufficient) condition for conscious experience. So >> > you could say that consciousness is a property of self-correlated >> > structures, existing timelessly as parts of the larger branching >> > chains of world-states. >> >> I presume that these are the SAS (self aware structures) described by >> Tegmark. > > Why would SASes be needed? Well---SAS means "self-aware-structure", no? Certainly sounds to me that Tegmark wants to identify conscious entities with SASs. > If anything it should be more like an observer bias to calculate out > [overcome?] due to the anthropic principles and so on, since all > subjective agents would present a slightly different bias in consciousness > or awareness; A classic example of a sentence needed a follow-up or two: "That is, ...", and "In other words....". I'm having trouble parsing that. > in more hard sci-fi terms, I'd argue that consciousness may not even > exist, despite my experience and my mind, it's not a magical sauce. :) Well, now that I've come out of the closet about some GLUTs being zombies, I could start with the incendiary remark that consciousness is the chief characteristic separating zombies from other passers of Turing Tests, e.g., us, and other passers for what we ordinarily think of as conscious entities (e.g. crows, parrots, chimps, dogs, liberals, etc.) >> [Bryan wrote] >> >> > Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only >> > you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of your >> > consciousness? Oh no. A particular GLUT in my original usage re consciousness focused on a strictly limited period in an entity's life. In other words, take an amount of time necessary to administer a Turing Test (or any other test you have in mind of finite duration), and create a GLUT that would answer just the same no matter what you ask the testees, human or GLUT. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. But now you're proposing a GLUT to characterize a person's whole life, and for me, that doesn't work at all, because a person (to me) travels through a trajectory in the space of all possible people (subspace of all possible algorithms). I hope it's not necessary to extend the already mind-bending notion of a GLUT that can successfully pass a limited interrogation. > [Lee wrote] >> Of course, as you know, this is at extreme variance with our >> normal usages of the words "you" and the time/places of your >> consciousness. For example, either under modal realism or the >> MWI, something extremely similar to me (under the conventional >> meanings of words) actually received a phone call a few minutes >> ago, and so is not typing this. It's a "possible world" under >> modal realism, and equally real under the MWI. Below, you use >> "versions of you" to talk about, for example, those Rafals who >> get to live forever, or those Lees who got a phone call. > > I was not expecting this diversion. Given the distinctions I made above, > if we discuss them some more, and it turns out that Lewis and his modal > realism is more about subjective agents and their GLUTs, Yikes! as said, I recoil from any but a very limited very *particular* GLUT covering, for example, a particular testing situation. I wouldn't even know where to start to make a GLUT for Rafal's Tree or my platonic fuzzy sphere of what a person is in configuration space. > rather than a metaphysical ensemble, then I think that you would > have to drop your MWI tie-ins. Wikipedia's two asterisk's items above already limit the connection between modal realism, and the MWI. It's not clear to me that you are adding to the criticism, but maybe so. > On my first passing of Rafal's email, it seemed to me that > the ensemble that he was describing was merely explanatory, and not > necessitating MWI or even itself -- merely as a way to describe data > structs in the world that we experience on a more abstract level. Yes. > [Lee asked Rafal] >> Now on your usage of words, you and I and all the Lee's who >> were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part >> of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want >> to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of >> Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow >> for overlap at their extreme edges. > > Are not all things, somehow related, if not physically then at least in > our minds? Come again? How is the most southern orange on the most southern orange tree in Florida related to President McKinley's assassin? I'm surely the first person in history to inquire about that ridiculous "relationship". > Somebody might reply to this saying "try to find a > correlation between X and Y" and that would only serve to show that > somebody has in fact made that correlation, and the more that people > read that email, the more 'real' it is becoming (I do not mean to say > that popular approval increases the realness, merely that the content > is diffused over the surface area of the local reality, so it is > becoming more than the 'nothing' that the original emailer was hoping > to select for). Then the relationship between the Holy Trinity and God must be pretty damn real by now. Thanks for the mental workout, (I think). :-) Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 16:00:24 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:00:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Modal Realism and Leibniz: (was The Many Dimensional Sculpture) In-Reply-To: <012901c886a9$646ed800$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> <012901c886a9$646ed800$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 15 March 2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Bryan writes in > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Bishop" > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:22 AM > > > I would not have expected an implicit connection between MWI and > > modal realism per Rafal's message. However, I took this opportunity > > to go look at the Wikipedia article > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_realism > > > > and I see what you mean: > >> Modal realism is the view, notably propounded by David Lewis, that > >> possible worlds are as real as the actual world. It is based on > >> the following notions: that possible worlds exist; possible worlds > >> are not different in kind to the actual world; possible worlds are > >> irreducible entities; the term "actual" in "actual world" is > >> indexical. > > As is so often the case---Singularity Be Praised---Wikipedia rises > to the challenge brilliantly: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possible_world > > Comparison with the many-worlds interpretation > > The concept of possible worlds has sometimes been compared with > the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics; indeed, they are > sometimes erroneously conflated. The many-worlds interpretation is an > attempt to provide an interpretation of nondeterministic processes > (such as measurement) without positing the so-called collapse of the > wavefunction, while the possible-worlds theory is an attempt to > provide an interpretation (in the sense of a more or less formal > semantics) for modal claims. In the many-worlds interpretation of > quantum mechanics, the collapse of the wavefunction is interpreted by > introducing a quantum superposition of states of a possibly infinite > number of identical "parallel universes", all of which exist > "actually", according to some proponents. The many-worlds > interpretation is silent on those questions of modality that > possible-world theories address. > > Major differences between the two notions, aside from their > origins and purposes, include: > > * The states of quantum-theoretical worlds are entangled > quantum mechanically while entanglement for possible worlds may be > meaningless; > > * according to a widely held orthodoxy among philosophers, > there are possible worlds that are logically but not physically > possible, but quantum-theoretical worlds are all physically possible. This part (direct last paragraph) needs to be double-checked. I know that what Wikipedia writes is mostly true in this sociohistorical context, but I also know that if it is not physically possible, then it is not 'logic', in the sense of the logic of the physics of the universe, you see (coherency, in the same sense that Jef uses the word). > Given that both possible-world theories and quantum many-world > theories are philosophically contentious, it is not surprising that > the precise relations between the two are also contentious. > > So my guess wasn't too far off! > > > Hrm. I really would like to add some Leibniz in on this. How could > > possibilities be as real as actualities? Let me reform my question. > > Is he saying that possibilities exist in the sense of mental > > constructs, such that one's lack of knowledge of the world > > essentially makes the world both the 'real' and the 'possible' as > > you recursively explore it and make your own representation? > > Alas, I'm no expert on Leibniz. Alas, I'm no beginning student of > Leibniz. Alas, I hardly rate even as a complete ignoramus on > Liebniz's philosophical views. But I'd be all ears for what you or > others have to say. No, you -- (see below) > > A vague, fuzzy set of what the world may or may not be, allowing > > subjective agents to explore it without messing up too much. Or is > > he saying that, metaphysically, the possibilities are as real as > > anything else? > > Help. Anyone familiar with Leibniz at all on this score? No, this isn't about Leibniz. I was asking of Lewis. :) > > Charles S. Peirce would have something to say about this use of > > the word 'possibility' since, naturally, it is more tied to the > > human mind, and he really, really disliked anybody saying something > > was 'possible' when they did not have the true source code to the > > universe to figure out the likelihood of something occurring or > > whether or not something was truly valid given whatever underlying > > laws of the universe there exist (whether a cellular automata rule > > or not, just so I can get in my mention of Wolfram and von Neumann > > etc.). > > So what---Peirce wanted to do to "possible" what I want to do to > "qualia"? That is, prescribe enough laws forbidding its use so that > the user to can be successfully prosecuted, and probably suffer > sanctions, fines, and solitary confinement somewhere? More directly: if it is not possible, then your coherency needs to be updated with some new nugget. You would not prescribe laws, but rather change your approach by reformulating what you know. Scientists probably have to do this all the time (unless they planned to avoid 'black swans', in which case they were probably more like engineers). > > Is Lewis saying that possibilities exist (in the sense that a > > mental agent can rationalize that something might be 'possible' > > given his limited understanding of the greater world), or that if > > we allow such 'possibilities' we automatically must acknowledge > > their full and total existence? > > As you saw, Rafal answered > > > ### The way I see it, everything exists. I mean it in the hardcore > > metaphysical sense - whatever it means to "be", everything you > > can think of and a lot more, have this property. Even > > contradictions, even inconsistent logic, even mathematical > > impossibilities exist, as hard [real] as rocks, except we are not > > there to touch them. > > and that seems like maybe what Lewis was saying indeed. I see. How can you mean it in the "hardcore metaphysical" sense, anyway? Hardcore means hardcore: cold, hard reality. Ah, well, I suppose we can step it up to a meta-level, but I don't think this is what Rafal _or_ Lewis means. By my meta-level, I mean in the sense of Egan, in the sense of his line: think about it; even if you are constructing the most ridiculously arbitrary mathematics in existence that has no relevance, you've just made it relevant to yourself! And so even inconsistent logic can be mapped back to our brains, and there is no law in reality saying that our brains can't have the chance to 'mess up' and make inconsistencies and incoherencies. But I think Rafal's "hardcore metaphysical" is more like Platonic Idealism -- a "meta dimension", which I can't (by the (un)nature of the thing itself) pin down. I recommend we apply So-And-So's rule here: we keep discussion to what we can access in reality and do, etc. etc. I do not know the actual name of this rule, I am pretty sure it has existed before. > > I like to use Leibniz's optimism and his definitions from time to > > time: 1) real - necessarily existent > > 2) impossible - necessarily nonexistent > > 3) possible - unnecessarily nonexistent > > And a few others. I realize now that I cannot recall a link that > > explains this terminology, but I do think it is still useful here > > since it ties possibilities/reality/actuality back to terms re: > > necessity and coherency. > > Thanks. Sounds useful to remember this about the views of the great > Hannover genius. I was offering it up for grabs, in the sense of taking it and using those vocabularies in this discussion. ;) > > If anything it should be more like an observer bias to calculate > > out [overcome?] due to the anthropic principles and so on, since > > all subjective agents would present a slightly different bias in > > consciousness or awareness; > > A classic example of a sentence needed a follow-up or two: "That is, > ...", and "In other words....". I'm having trouble parsing that. That's because I am having trouble processing the thought in general. I can explain it from a completely different perspective that I have come across before (on my own), but this is by no means helpful in expanding the concept, perhaps only in letting it incubate in a few minds. From time to time over the past decade, I have taken to the 'metaphysics' or whatever of existence and the Beginning question: i.e., how could something come from nothing? How could there ever have been nothing, since nothing is something, but that something was nothing, which was, and on and on and on. More recently I have formalized this as taking Occam's razor to any idea, to any question, and chopping down at it. I ask you to take the razor to any concept that you can think of, and use the razor (go on, do it -- cut away). No matter how much you cut, you still have something left. This seems to be the same with the anthropic principle and my personal perspective on reality, naturally since the knife cannot cut itself. So, Tegmark apparently argues that this means that there are SASes all the way down to the fundamental basis of reality, but I don't see how he makes that leap, and I don't see it as necessary. > > in more hard sci-fi terms, I'd argue that consciousness may not > > even exist, despite my experience and my mind, it's not a magical > > sauce. :) > > Well, now that I've come out of the closet about some GLUTs being > zombies, I could start with the incendiary remark that consciousness > is the chief characteristic separating zombies from other passers of > Turing Tests, e.g., us, and other passers for what we ordinarily > think of as conscious entities (e.g. crows, parrots, chimps, dogs, > liberals, etc.) Huh? Turing Test requires another subjective agent to judge some other process, it does nothing to do any fundamental provision to ... I do not know how to explain this. But the Turing Test doesn't really add anything to my toolbox personally, it just adds it to the *social* toolbox. I need better terminology (and, to take your requests for examples and explanations to heart:). in this sense, the Turing Test is a mental tool that is on top of social layers in society, from brain to brain, and is generally a result of the various Minskyian filters in the brain or other selective processes of attention. Then, somehow, a 'decision' is made to press a button, saying yes/no as to whether the thing passes the Turing Test. I suppose you could say that I am claiming that the Turing Test is not standardized, **but** equivalently if we had a 'standardized test' in the same form as the SAT or TAKS (the local state-wide "pass to graduate, or else" test) since those tests may be 'standardized' but they are not a proof or theorem or test in the same sense as we can use a number line test in calculus or the various theorem-solvers that are all across the internet. > >> > Like a GLUT (Giant Look-Up Table) of you? And this is the only > >> > you, the one and unique representation and the time/place of > >> > your consciousness? > > Oh no. A particular GLUT in my original usage re consciousness > focused on a strictly limited period in an entity's life. In other > words, take an amount of time necessary to administer a Turing Test > (or any other test you have in mind of finite duration), and create a > GLUT that would answer just the same no matter what you ask > the testees, human or GLUT. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. > > But now you're proposing a GLUT to characterize a person's > whole life, and for me, that doesn't work at all, because a person > (to me) travels through a trajectory in the space of all possible > people (subspace of all possible algorithms). I hope it's not > necessary to extend the already mind-bending notion of a GLUT > that can successfully pass a limited interrogation. I also thought of a process/tree-thing that would also be algorithmically going through such structs and mathematics, yes. You should also go see my email when I replied to Rafal after he replied to that same comment of mine -- "I was not expecting that diversion" is particularly relevant here, as copied below: > I was not expecting this diversion. Given the distinctions I made > above, if we discuss them some more, and it turns out that Lewis and > his modal realism is more about subjective agents and their GLUTs, > rathe than a metaphysical ensemble, then I think that you would have > to drop your MWI tie-ins. On my first passing of Rafal's email, it > seemed to me that the ensemble that he was describing was merely > explanatory, and not necessitating MWI or even itself -- merely as a > way to describe data structs in the world that we experience on a more > abstract level. To continue: > > [Lee wrote] > > > >> Of course, as you know, this is at extreme variance with our > >> normal usages of the words "you" and the time/places of your > >> consciousness. For example, either under modal realism or the > >> MWI, something extremely similar to me (under the conventional > >> meanings of words) actually received a phone call a few minutes > >> ago, and so is not typing this. It's a "possible world" under > >> modal realism, and equally real under the MWI. Below, you use > >> "versions of you" to talk about, for example, those Rafals who > >> get to live forever, or those Lees who got a phone call. > > > > I was not expecting this diversion. Given the distinctions I made > > above, if we discuss them some more, and it turns out that Lewis > > and his modal realism is more about subjective agents and their > > GLUTs, > > Yikes! as said, I recoil from any but a very limited very > *particular* GLUT covering, for example, a particular testing > situation. I wouldn't even know where to start to make a GLUT for > Rafal's Tree or my platonic fuzzy sphere of what a person is in > configuration space. Alright, looks like you saw that already. > > rather than a metaphysical ensemble, then I think that you would > > have to drop your MWI tie-ins. > > Wikipedia's two asterisk's items above already limit the connection > between modal realism, and the MWI. It's not clear to me that you > are adding to the criticism, but maybe so. Yep, I think I am. See my points about "logic" and if it's logical, then how is it impossible, you didn't account for whatever new nuggets in reality that you found etc. etc. Simple reasoning ("x causes y") can be confirmed in the mind itself, but also in experimental checking (sort of), so as you get more advanced, it requires more checking, and I think this is why there's that gap where people assume "logic has to be so, so there has to be a further reality where this holds" - when in fact, the logic is supposed to be confirmed and molded (humbled?) by reality, no? > > [Lee asked Rafal] > > > >> Now on your usage of words, you and I and all the Lee's who > >> were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part > >> of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want > >> to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of > >> Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow > >> for overlap at their extreme edges. > > > > Are not all things, somehow related, if not physically then at > > least in our minds? > > Come again? How is the most southern orange on the most southern > orange tree in Florida related to President McKinley's assassin? > I'm surely the first person in history to inquire about that > ridiculous "relationship". And thus you have given ... ah, wait, I have already explained myself (as you quote directly below - thanks): > > Somebody might reply to this saying "try to find a > > correlation between X and Y" and that would only serve to show that > > somebody has in fact made that correlation, and the more that > > people read that email, the more 'real' it is becoming (I do not > > mean to say that popular approval increases the realness, merely > > that the content is diffused over the surface area of the local > > reality, so it is becoming more than the 'nothing' that the > > original emailer was hoping to select for). > > Then the relationship between the Holy Trinity and God must be > pretty damn real by now. Heh. I am not familiar with that particular relationship. But suppose that we have ABC and XYZ things in reality, and we claim ABC some relation XYZ. Thus, our brains have been thinking of this relation between these two (ABC and XYZ) things. Now, if you chant it over and over again, that does not make the relation physically expressed, but it does in fact make your brain tick in different ways, your mind-brain is physical, no? It is processing matter, energy, information, and so is making new structs as you go along, thinking about those relations. Those new structs are physically there in the brain: think of it like electrical storms across millions of neurons and exciting whirlpools of viscous, incompressible fluids, kind of like the top of your flakey cereal bowl except more exciting than breakfast at five in the morning. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Mar 15 17:25:37 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:25:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Modal Realism and Leibniz: (was The Many Dimensional Sculpture) In-Reply-To: <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> <012901c886a9$646ed800$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > * according to a widely held orthodoxy among philosophers, > > there are possible worlds that are logically but not physically > > possible, but quantum-theoretical worlds are all physically possible. > > This part (direct last paragraph) needs to be double-checked. I know > that what Wikipedia writes is mostly true in this sociohistorical > context, but I also know that if it is not physically possible, then it > is not 'logic', in the sense of the logic of the physics of the > universe, you see (coherency, in the same sense that Jef uses the > word). I think I use the term "coherent" in its standard sense, and I most certainly do not mean it in the sense you ascribe to me above. I find so many of these statements jarring in their presumption of an Archimedian point of reference functional in terms of what's real and true. It seems to me that almost all of this discussion, involving thoughts of metaphysics, logic, quantum and macro "reality" and "truth" revolves around common (and basic) epistemological confusion. I don't have the bandwidth to elaborate (I've tried), but I'm encouraged that Eliezer does seem to, and is doing quite a good job in my opinion on the Overcoming Bias blog -- recommended for those who find these topics mysterious. - Jef From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 18:03:10 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:03:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten Message-ID: <2d6187670803151103o799ee6f8w420438fccc0c1c32@mail.gmail.com> This Washington Post article tells of a Nazi-era law that present-day Germany is still enforcing! What the hell is going on?? John Grigg "Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031304353_2.html?referrer=emailarticle BERLIN, March 13 -- Americans with PhDs beware: Telling people in Germanythat you're a doctor could land you in jail. At least seven U.S. citizens working as researchers in Germany have faced criminal probes in recent months for using the title "Dr." on their business cards, Web sites and r??sum??s. They all hold doctoral degrees from elite universities back home. Under a little-known Nazi-era law, only people who earn PhDs or medical degrees in Germany are allowed to use "Dr." as a courtesy title. The law was modified in 2001 to extend the privilege to degree-holders from any country in the European Union. But docs from the United States and anywhere else outside Europeare still forbidden to use the honorific. Violators can face a year behind bars. Ian Thomas Baldwin, a Cornell-educated researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology in Jena, has stopped calling himself "Dr." ever since he was summoned for interrogation by police two months ago on suspicion of "title abuse." "Coming from the States, I had assumed that when you get a letter from the criminal police, you've either murdered someone or embezzled something or done something serious," said Baldwin, a molecular ecologist. "It is absurd. It's totally absurd." No one has questioned the legitimacy of his degree or whether he has the right to conduct research here. But going by "Dr." is verboten. If he wants to refer to his doctorate, German law dictates that he identify himself as "Prof. Ian Thomas Baldwin, PhD, Cornell University ." Baldwin confessed in a telephone interview that "there's no question I'm guilty as charged." But he hopes prosecutors will give him a break. In his defense, he noted that the Max Planck Institute has always addressed him as "Prof. Dr. Baldwin" since it offered him a job a decade ago, and nobody warned him he might be in legal peril if he did likewise. The proper use of honorifics is no small matter in Germany, a society given to formality where even longtime neighbors insist on addressing each other using their surnames. Those with advanced degrees like to show them off, and it is not uncommon to earn more than one. A male faculty member with two PhDs can fully expect to be called "Herr Professor Dr. Dr. Schmidt," for example. In effect, forcing Americans to forsake their titles amounts to a social demotion. "It's an indication of the hierarchization of German society," said Gary Smith, director of the American Academy in Berlin. "Germans are much more status-conscious about these things, and the status is real." Smith holds a doctorate from Boston Universityand has tempted fate by answering to "Dr. Smith" during the two decades he's lived in Germany. He said he was told years ago that there is a legal way for foreign PhDs and MDs to register for permission to use the appellation, but he has never bothered. "It wasn't worth the trouble of doing anything about it," he said. "It's really an absurd situation in a globalized world." The German doctor rule has been in effect since the 1930s, but it has been only sporadically enforced in recent years. That changed last fall, when an anonymous tipster filed a complaint with federal prosecutors against seven Americans at the prestigious Max Planck Society, which operates 80 scientific research institutes across Germany. Federal authorities forwarded the complaint to prosecutors and police in at least three states, who decided to take action. Joerg Stolz, the chief prosecutor in the city of Jena, which is investigating Baldwin and another researcher at the Max Planck Institute there on suspicion of title abuse, said those two probes were "near closure." He said his office had recommended to a judge against filing charges. In that event, he said, the matter would be referred to the Cultural Ministry in the state of Thuringia, which could still decide whether a civil fine is warranted. Detlef Baer, a spokesman for the ministry, said officials planned to drop both cases. "We spoke with the parties involved and determined they had no criminal intent," he said. "They were given instructions as to how they can refer to their titles," by citing the degree but not calling themselves doctors. Another American investigated by police is an astrophysicist with a doctorate from Caltechand membership in the German Academy of Sciences. The criminal investigations have alarmed higher education officials in Germany, where U.S. researchers are in high demand and treated as blue-chip recruits. Last week, state education ministers met in Berlin and recommended that the law be modified so anyone holding a doctorate or medical degree from America could be addressed as "Dr." without running afoul of the police. "This is a completely overdone, mad, absolutely ridiculous situation," said Barbara Buchal-Hoever, head of Germany's central office for foreign education. "We are talking about highly acclaimed researchers here. . . . The people who have pressed charges must be gripers or troublemakers who wanted to make a totally absurd point." Even if the proposal is adopted, however, it would extend the privilege only to people with degrees from about 200 U.S. universities accredited by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Anyone with a PhD from Canada, Japanor the rest of the non-European world would still be excluded. For now, the old law remains on the books. It is unclear when, or if, Germany's state parliaments will change it. So the next time Dr. Condoleezza Rice(PhD, University of Denver) or even German-born Dr. Henry Kissinger(PhD, Harvard) pay a visit to Berlin, they may want to stick with the title "secretary of state." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 18:23:17 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:23:17 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Rational?? -- Don't make me laugh! Message-ID: The AGI list has drawn my attention to a NYT book review: PREDICTABLY IRRATIONAL The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. By Dan Ariely. 280 pp. Harper/HarperCollins Publishers. $25.95. Quote: At the heart of the market approach to understanding people is a set of assumptions. First, you are a coherent and unitary self. Second, you can be sure of what this self of yours wants and needs, and can predict what it will do. Third, you get some information about yourself from your body ? objective facts about hunger, thirst, pain and pleasure that help guide your decisions. Standard economics, as Ariely writes, assumes that all of us, equipped with this sort of self, "know all the pertinent information about our decisions" and "we can calculate the value of the different options we face." We are, for important decisions, rational, and that's what makes markets so effective at finding value and allocating work. To borrow from H. L. Mencken, the market approach presumes that "the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." What the past few decades of work in psychology, sociology and economics has shown, as Ariely describes, is that all three of these assumptions are false. A more accurate picture is that there are a bunch of different versions of you, who come to the fore under different conditions. We aren't cool calculators of self-interest who sometimes go crazy; we're crazies who are, under special circumstances, sometimes rational. ------------------------- BillK From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 18:30:14 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:30:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Attribution error? (was: Modal Realism and Leibniz: (was The Many)) In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803151330.14557.kanzure@gmail.com> On Saturday 15 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > I think I use the term "coherent" in its standard sense, and I most > certainly do not mean it in the sense you ascribe to me above. Please excuse me while I go recheck. If you do in fact mean the most general sense, then doesn't it mean an integrative model, in the sense of no compile-time errors? But, since I apparently falsely attributed the definition to you, I'll go back through the docs and double check. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 15 18:46:05 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:46:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] SF parody of the "Seven Deadly Social Sins" Message-ID: <2d6187670803151146y50226df6x1575499af27bab6d@mail.gmail.com> And to think this was written by a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest who is an Assistant Dean at Georgetown University! John Grigg : ) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/14/AR2008031403387.html?tid=informbox Take Me to Your Sinners ** ** Sunday, March 16, 2008; Page B02 *In the 6th century, Pope Gregory the Great cracked the whip and spelled out the seven deadly sins of Catholicism: pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed and sloth. Almost 1,500 years later, the Vatican last weekend identified some newfangled transgressions, including genetic manipulation, pollution, drug abuse and excessive wealth.* *While human nature and the temptations that bedevil it never change, technology does -- and presents ever more vexing ethical questions. Who knows? In 3508, the Vatican's list of mortal sins might include* *. . .* ** *1. EARTHISM*, or the belief that the cultures and practices of terrestrial societies are superior to those of other planets. Such planeto-centric bigotry leads to intergalactic discord and exploitation. ** *2. ILLICIT* *REPLICATION*, or the use of technology to make harmful objects materialize instantaneously. Licit replication -- for example, "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot." -- remains kosher. But its illicit brother, "Handgun. Unregistered. Loaded," is a no-no. *3*. *THOUGHT LARCENY*, or the pilfering of another person's ideas through telepathic technology. Such thievery violates the sacredness of the individual conscience. *4. HOLOLUST*, or the satisfaction of sexual appetite through holodeck technology, which allows simulated encounters with holographic organisms. (See also: hologluttony.) *5. VIOLATION OF JUST WARP THEORY*, or the use of warp-drive technology when the benefits of super-fast travel are not commensurate with the dilithium resources expended or the collateral damage done to the interstellar environment. In other words, don't speed between stars unless your wife is having a baby. *6. STASIS ABUSE*, or the use of life-suspending technology to dodge unpleasant duties. Parents may not spend their children's teenage years in suspended animation. (N.B.: In the interest of family tranquility, parents may, however, temporarily place their children in suspended animation.) *7.* *TIMELINE MANIPULATION*, or the use of time travel to undo sinful actions. This only makes matters worse -- a venial sin becomes a mortal one if the sinner goes back in time to erase it. Knowing that many humans will nevertheless succumb to this temptation, priests should give carefully worded absolution: " *On this timeline,* I absolve you in the name of the Father, and of the Son . . ." *-- Father Ryan Maher, S.J., is an assistant dean at Georgetown University .* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 15 19:14:49 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:14:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. Message-ID: <8CA54E7F927A19B-BB4-2934@FWM-D39.sysops.aol.com> Lee wrote: "Recall that the Germans don't even have a word for "mind". So are they just lost souls in examining these questions? No, it just means that we cannot---must not---put too much weight on any particular word." ________________ Most of us often mistake a word or thought as the territory/reality. We use the mind/map to navigate our way out of the forest of trees. However the map/mind or brain is flexible depending upon the circumstances of birth/genes and random events. The movement/behavior of the mind is affected by evolution as well as the movements of ions and electrons in the quantum world. ______________ Lee wrote: "Your last sentence "How do you test if the mind is a behavior of the brain?" really ought to have been followed by one sentence starting "That is, ..." which used different terms to try to say the same thing (the acid test of whether one is thinking clearly, and possibly even a second follow-up sentence starting "In other words..." ____________ Another way of saying it simply{ via occam"s razor}, without the brain there is no mind. How do you test this? That would be removing the brain or putting you under general anesthesia wherein the five senses including the sixth sense/the mind located in the brain's uppermost layer /the cerebral cortex in suspended state of cognition. In awareness or awakened state, the mind as a living matter observes thoughts as rising and falling like a wave, thus the observer is the observed. Hope that helps, Terry P.S. Terry, sorry to be taking out on you a lot of criticism that could and should be directed at about 62.7% of the posts on this and related threads. _____________ No need to apologize. I'm thankful for your posts and other related posts. From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Mar 15 19:52:58 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 12:52:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Attribution error? (was: Modal Realism and Leibniz: (was The Many)) In-Reply-To: <200803151330.14557.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> <200803151330.14557.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Saturday 15 March 2008, Jef Allbright wrote: > > I think I use the term "coherent" in its standard sense, and I most > > certainly do not mean it in the sense you ascribe to me above. > > Please excuse me while I go recheck. If you do in fact mean the most > general sense, I said the *standard* sense, specifically more specific than the "most general" sense. > then doesn't it mean an integrative model, huh? > in the sense of no compile-time errors? A problem with your metaphor is that compilers deal almost exclusively with syntax, rather than semantics. [I know, optimizing compilers are venturing into semantics, but when they get to the level of effectively *understanding* their input, they will be long past mere compilers.] > But, since I apparently falsely attributed > the definition to you, I'll go back through the docs and double check. I don't think it wasn't mistaken attribution, but the very epistemological confusion I was pointing to. For a long time on this list, I've observed intelligent and determinedly rational posters like Robin Hanson, Hal Finney, Lee Corbin, John Clark, the younger Eliezer... harbor and nurture this implicit assumption of an Archimedian point functioning as a reference to "reality" or "truth." It pervades the thinking of many rationalists, burning with a moral fervor protective of a belief in objective Truth as if a last refuge from entropic and eccentric slide into relativism or (worse) postmodernism. NOTE: I am by no means disparaging objectivity nor defending relativism. I am saying that most of what passes for informed discussion is epistemologically incomplete. I'm tempted to write a full essay on this topic, but (1) I have no doubt it would generate more heat than light, and (2) my boss, who watches *everything* I do, even when I'm alone, reminds me there's more rewarding and immediate work to be done in the world of technologies for increasing awareness. - Jef From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 15 22:30:53 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:30:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. Message-ID: <8CA55035CCD1884-17B0-1396@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> "> The problem of philosophy in general is it's subjective nature > prescribing some treatment{ a thought/idea} to view objective > reality/truth. What is truth? Asking that question is already a mistake. > > > and> > > Ultimately, again, I want to know what actions I should take and > > what I can expect the different outcomes to be like." > _____________ > > Probability connotes random chance. Scientific theories are put to test > {an objective process}. How do you test if the mind is a behavior of > the brain? This is when the observer is the observed. Jef: "Wow, far-out! I mean, totally." __________ Hi, Jef, philosophies are nothing but maps/movement of the mind/thoughts subject to error. As someone said a map is not the territory/truth. If you asked what is truth? I'd say,why do you ask? You said you want to know what actions to take or what you expect it to be. Can you be more specific? The topic "Probability is in the mind" sound vague to me. Probabillity according to the dictionary is that which is likely to happen. Is it an educated guess or not? Probably either depends on how the mind is trained by the subject/doer. Philosophers are trained in logic, using reason to navigate reality. But scientists do not depend on reason alone. They use scientific devices i. e. MRI to map the brain.This technological tool accurately showed the parts of the brain involved in thinking and feeling. The subject is awake and asked what he thinks or feels at the moment. If you are awaked, you respond as asked. You as the subject is at the same time is an observer of your thoughts and feelings. Terry From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 16 02:58:59 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:58:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Modal Realism and Leibniz References: <7641ddc60803101928q44b22a7bs8e9286d29c4d1a7b@mail.gmail.com> <200803111022.55052.kanzure@gmail.com> <012901c886a9$646ed800$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803151100.24409.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <017401c88711$deefcb30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Bryan writes > Lee wrote: >> Major differences between the [Modal Realism and MWI], >> aside from their origins and purposes, include: >> >> * The states of quantum-theoretical worlds are entangled >> quantum mechanically while entanglement for possible worlds may be >> meaningless; >> >> * according to a widely held orthodoxy among philosophers, >> there are possible worlds that are logically but not physically >> possible, but quantum-theoretical worlds are all physically possible. > > This part (direct last paragraph) needs to be double-checked. I know > that what Wikipedia writes is mostly true in this sociohistorical > context, but I also know that if it is not physically possible, then it > is not 'logic', in the sense of the logic of the physics of the > universe, you see (coherency, in the same sense that Jef uses the > word). Don't know from "coherency", but your "logic of physics" is not what they are talking about. For example, it is logically possible that using my special mental powers I could teleport to Ganymede and back during the next ten minutes, even though that is not physically possible because of FTL restrictions. >> > Charles S. Peirce would have something to say about this use of >> > the word 'possibility' since, naturally, it is more tied to the >> > human mind, and he really, really disliked anybody saying something >> > was 'possible' when they did not have the true source code to the >> > universe... >> >> So what---Peirce wanted to do to "possible" what I want to do to >> "qualia"? [I.e., get rid of the term and probably the concept.] > > More directly: if it is not possible, then your coherency needs to be > updated with some new nugget. I don't know from coherency. It helps me a lot when people use a variety of different terms and phrases to describe what they're talking about. (As you can see, I'm not in a terribly good mood today---sorry about that.) >> > Is Lewis saying that possibilities exist (in the sense that a >> > mental agent can rationalize that something might be 'possible' >> > given his limited understanding of the greater world), or that if >> > we allow such 'possibilities' we automatically must acknowledge >> > their full and total existence? >> >> As you saw, Rafal answered >> >> > ### The way I see it, everything exists. I mean it in the hardcore >> > metaphysical sense - whatever it means to "be", everything you >> > can think of and a lot more, have this property. Even >> > contradictions, even inconsistent logic, even mathematical >> > impossibilities exist, as hard [real] as rocks, except we are not >> > there to touch them. >> >> and that seems like maybe what Lewis was saying indeed. > > I see. How can you mean it in the "hardcore metaphysical" sense, anyway? > Hardcore means hardcore: cold, hard reality. I would say that hardcore metaphysical reality means something like "not just in someone's imagination, but rather really existing if not in this world than in some other equally real world". But that's just a guess. That's what I inferred Rafal to mean (and I concur). > Ah, well, I suppose we can step it up to a meta-level, but I > don't think this is what Rafal _or_ Lewis means. I guess you're right. > By my meta-level, I mean in the sense of Egan, in the sense of > his line: think about it; even if you are constructing the most > ridiculously arbitrary mathematics in existence that has no > relevance, you've just made it relevant to yourself! And so even > inconsistent logic can be mapped back to our brains, and there is no > law in reality saying that our brains can't have the chance to 'mess > up' and make inconsistencies and incoherencies. Certainly. But I don't know if you're referring to Permutation City or Diaspora or what. But it doesn't matter to me. For example, for me to try to dream up a system of super-imaginary numbers obeying the property that s = s + 1 (instead of the mundane imaginary numbers where s*s + 1 = 0) might turn out to be nearly as foolish as to work out a theory of round squares. (Before anyone talks about infinity satisfying that first equation or other amazing constructions, let me just say that I did explore that years ago, but didn't find the results at all interesting.) > But I think Rafal's "hardcore metaphysical" is more like Platonic Idealism -- > a "meta dimension", which I can't (by the (un)nature of the thing > itself) pin down. I recommend we apply So-And-So's rule here: we keep > discussion to what we can access in reality and do, etc. etc. I do not > know the actual name of this rule, I am pretty sure it has existed before. Hear, hear! Even though I am a mathematical platonist, and I believe in the literal existence of, say, every positive integer and (equivalently) in the literal existence of every pattern. But for now, yeah, let's keep it to "what we can access in reality" as you suggest. I happen to believe strongly in MWI, and following David Deutsch in the fabulous "Fabric of Reality", the shadow photons *really* are around us all the time and are needed to account for everything we see, feel, or hear. >> > 1) real - necessarily existent >> > 2) impossible - necessarily nonexistent >> > 3) possible - unnecessarily nonexistent >> >... >> > If anything it should be more like an observer bias to calculate >> > out [overcome?] due to the anthropic principles and so on, since >> > all subjective agents would present a slightly different bias in >> > consciousness or awareness; >> >> A classic example of a sentence needed a follow-up or two: "That is, >> ...", and "In other words....". I'm having trouble parsing that. > > That's because I am having trouble processing the thought in general. Well, if you make a few other stabs at least in *trying* to say in in other ways, it always helps. "Always", even in those cases that a failure to paraphrase or rephrase exposes the vacuousness or lack of substance of the notion. > I can explain it from a completely different perspective that I have come > across before (on my own), but this is by no means helpful in expanding > the concept, perhaps only in letting it incubate in a few minds. From > time to time over the past decade, I have taken to the 'metaphysics' or > whatever of existence and the Beginning question: i.e., how could > something come from nothing? How could there ever have been nothing, > since nothing is something, but that something was nothing, which was, > and on and on and on. More recently I have formalized this as taking > Occam's razor to any idea, to any question, and chopping down at it. Well, the "why is there something rather than nothing" and all that no longer interest me at all. Occam's razor, on the other hand, is of course a sensible and almost always sure guide. > I ask you to take the razor to any concept that you can think of, > and use the razor (go on, do it -- cut away). Hmm. You apply it to *concepts* and ideas, questions,etc. I never heard of doing that. I always applied it to alternative explanations. You sure it's appropriate to expand The Razor this way? Do you just mean refining ideas, simplifying questions and so forth? If you really mean something more than just that, what, exactly? > Tegmark apparently argues that this means that there are SASes > all the way down to the fundamental basis of reality, but I don't > see how he makes that leap, and I don't see it as necessary. That's two of us. But there is a very noticeable and intelligent group of people who, exemplified by Schmidhuber, want badly to reduce time to something else, i.e., just plain patterns. Take Julian Barbour's book, for example. In fact, take my copy. >> > in more hard sci-fi terms, I'd argue that consciousness may not >> > even exist, despite my experience and my mind, it's not a magical >> > sauce. :) >> >> Well, now that I've come out of the closet about some GLUTs being >> zombies, I could start with the incendiary remark that consciousness >> is the chief characteristic separating zombies from other passers of >> Turing Tests, e.g., us, and other passers for what we ordinarily >> think of as conscious entities (e.g. crows, parrots, chimps, dogs, >> liberals, etc.) > > Huh? Turing Test requires another subjective agent to judge some other > process, it does nothing to do any fundamental provision to ... I do > not know how to explain this. But the Turing Test doesn't really add > anything to my toolbox personally, it just adds it to the *social* > toolbox. Maybe a bad example on my part. The TT is mostly about identifying intelligence, not consciousness. Okay. It has other problems too. > I need better terminology (and, to take your requests for > examples and explanations to heart:). in this sense, the Turing Test is > a mental tool that is on top of social layers in society, from brain to > brain, and is generally a result of the various Minskyian filters in > the brain or other selective processes of attention. Could be, I suppose. "Mental tool that is on top of social layers in society", eh? The only thing I'm sure of is that there is nothing wrong with your imagination. I'd need to think about that a while. >> > rather than a metaphysical ensemble, then I think that you would >> > have to drop your MWI tie-ins. >> >> Wikipedia's two asterisk's items above already limit the connection >> between modal realism, and the MWI. It's not clear to me that you >> are adding to the criticism, but maybe so. > > Yep, I think I am. See my points about "logic" and if it's logical, then > how is it impossible, you didn't account for whatever new nuggets in > reality that you found etc. etc. Simple reasoning ("x causes y") can be > confirmed in the mind itself, "Confirmed" or "validated". You better be careful with this stuff. When you're on a roll like this, why don't you start new threads? > but also in experimental checking (sort of), so as you get more > advanced, it requires more checking, and I think this is why there's > that gap where people assume "logic has to be so, so there has to > be a further reality where this holds" - when in fact, the logic is > supposed to be confirmed and molded (humbled?) by reality, no? When you write "logic", the first thing I think of is mathematical logic. The discipline of formal logic, a branch of mathematics or vice-versa, depending on the species of philosopher of math you're talking to. I cannot see how to say "yes" to your question. Logic stands apart from physics so far as I know. The nearest thing I ever heard of (which actually seems to contradict your statement) is "quantum logic", which is to me (and entirely due to my ignorance) a rather poor way to deal with the "paradoxes" of QM. You see, on the readings of these truly bright people that study quantum logic, "ordinary logic" isn't quite enough for QM. So you see, physics doesn't lay a glove on ordinary logic or ordinary formal logic. This really oughta been in a different thread, we (i.e. you) have wondered far afield :-) >> > [Lee asked Rafal] >> > >> >> Now on your usage of words, you and I and all the Lee's who >> >> were/are fighting in the Second World War, are simply a part >> >> of the great Tree of Me. An immediate difficulty you might want >> >> to address is, "Does the tree of Lee overlap with the tree of >> >> Rafal?" If not, why not? My own "fuzzy spheres" do allow >> >> for overlap at their extreme edges. >> > >> > Are not all things, somehow related, if not physically then at >> > least in our minds? >> >> Come again? How is the most southern orange on the most southern >> orange tree in Florida related to President McKinley's assassin? >> I'm surely the first person in history to inquire about that >> ridiculous "relationship". > > And thus you have given ... ah, wait, I have already explained myself > (as you quote directly below - thanks): Mind snipping stuff like this Bryan? Most of us don't just go in for stream-of-consciousness posting. (Sorry again about my bad mood today.) The last few paragraphs are probably just bloat. >> > Somebody might reply to this saying "try to find a >> > correlation between X and Y" and that would only serve to show that >> > somebody has in fact made that correlation, and the more that >> > people read that email, the more 'real' it is becoming (I do not >> > mean to say that popular approval increases the realness, merely >> > that the content is diffused over the surface area of the local >> > reality, so it is becoming more than the 'nothing' that the >> > original emailer was hoping to select for). >> >> Then the relationship between the Holy Trinity and God must be >> pretty damn real by now. > > Heh. I am not familiar with that particular relationship. But suppose > that we have ABC and XYZ things in reality, and we claim ABC > [has] some relation [to] XYZ. You mean the set {A,B,C} has some relationship to the set {X,Y,Z}. BTW, please criticize my rendering of your sentence by the [] insertions that I thought made it grammatical, if necessary. > Thus, our brains have been thinking of this relation > between these two (ABC and XYZ) things. Now, if you chant it over and > over again, that does not make the relation physically expressed, but > it does in fact make your brain tick in different ways, your mind-brain > is physical, no? It is processing matter, energy, information, and so > is making new structs as you go along, thinking about those relations. Indeed, our left brains are especially good at generating bullshit at manic rates. I don't have time to see if you are getting at something profound here or not. > Those new structs are physically there in the brain: think of it like > electrical storms across millions of neurons and exciting whirlpools of > viscous, incompressible fluids, kind of like the top of your flakey > cereal bowl except more exciting than breakfast at five in the morning. That's what those thunderstorms of neuronal activity are, all right. But that hardly makes them correspond to anything but their own wild storming---if they're just "mad raving" having no connection to physical reality outside the skin then I pay them no attention. Lee P.S. I have no time to carefully proof-read the above. Your post was 20K long. If my reply is that long, then I'll kill myself. Gotta snip. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 16 03:04:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:04:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Rational?? -- Don't make me laugh! References: Message-ID: <017a01c88712$9389ecb0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> BillK writes > The AGI list has drawn my attention to a NYT book review: > > > PREDICTABLY IRRATIONAL > The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. > By Dan Ariely. > 280 pp. Harper/HarperCollins Publishers. $25.95. > > Quote: > At the heart of the market approach to understanding people is a set > of assumptions. First, you are a coherent and unitary self. Second, > you can be sure of what this self of yours wants and needs, and can > predict what it will do. Third, you get some information about > yourself from your body ? objective facts about hunger, thirst, pain > and pleasure that help guide your decisions. Standard economics, as > Ariely writes, assumes that all of us, equipped with this sort of > self, "know all the pertinent information about our decisions" and "we > can calculate the value of the different options we face." We are, for > important decisions, rational, and that's what makes markets so > effective at finding value and allocating work. To borrow from H. L. > Mencken, the market approach presumes that "the common people know > what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." > > What the past few decades of work in psychology, sociology and > economics has shown, as Ariely describes, is that all three of these > assumptions are false. Maybe that explains why markets work so badly in distributing scarce resources, and why there are so many other economic systems that work so much better---or at least, soon will work so much better after we design them. After all, we are so smart that we can easily something superior to markets and capitalism. Lee (feeling a even a little nastier today than usual) > A more accurate picture is that there are a bunch of different > versions of you, who come to the fore under different conditions. We > aren't cool calculators of self-interest who sometimes go crazy; we're > crazies who are, under special circumstances, sometimes rational. _________________________________________________________ "Economics is the study of scarce resources which have alternative uses." -Thomas Sowell From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 16 03:24:35 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:24:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind. References: <8CA54E7F927A19B-BB4-2934@FWM-D39.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <017e01c88715$61ac1670$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes > Lee wrote: > > "Recall that the Germans don't even have a word for "mind". > So are they just lost souls in examining these questions? > No, it just means that we cannot---must not---put too > much weight on any particular word." > ________________ > > Most of us often mistake a word or thought as the territory/reality. Not the people I hang with, Terry. :-) > We use the mind/map to navigate our way out of the forest of trees. > However the map/mind or brain is flexible depending upon the > circumstances of birth/genes and random events. > The movement/behavior of the mind is affected by evolution as well as > the movements of ions and electrons in the quantum world. How right you are, though the behavior of the "mind" is affected at "different levels" by those things, if you will. > ______________ > > Lee wrote: "Your last sentence > "How do you test if the mind is a behavior of the brain?" > really ought to have been followed by one sentence > starting "That is, ..." which used different terms to try to > say the same thing (the acid test of whether one is thinking > clearly), and possibly even a second follow-up sentence > starting with "In other words..." > ____________ > > Another way of saying it simply{ via occam"s razor}, without the brain > there is no mind. How do you test this? What does it even mean? I already pointed the finger of deep suspicion at the word "mind". Maybe you're saying "without the brain, there is (almost) no intelligence, volition, consciousness and so on. In other words, the brain supports who we are and our "minds"." If so, a test would be, "remove the brain of an animal and see whether it appears to display its normal activity, usual awareness of its surroundings, reacts to stimuli in the same way, and so on"? If that's the kind of test you have in mind, boy, I sure know how I'd bet on the outcome! > That would be removing the brain or putting you under general > anesthesia wherein the five senses including the sixth sense/the mind > located in the brain's uppermost layer /the cerebral cortex in > suspended state of cognition. Yes. > In awareness or awakened state, the mind as a living matter > observes thoughts as rising and falling like a wave, thus the > observer is the observed. Sounds right. Let me paraphrase. "In an aware or awakened state, our intelligence, volition, sensory ability, responsiveness to stimuli as living matter (of a very *special* kind, no other organ but the brain can be put to this test, right?) is capable of learning about its own reactions to not only outside stimuli, but of learning about its own reactions to its own reactions". Am I doing okay here? That is, does it seem like I'm reading you correctly? > Hope that helps, I think it did. Thanks, Terry. But you do know how fraught with peril are statements involving observers, and even statements involving "observed" things. Why, in QM alone, the concept of the observer has brought about incalculable damage and misunderstanding. So when I see a statement such as "the observer is observed", it screams out at me for further qualification. Anyway, I seem to have lost track of your original point. Might it be made in a new thread? Or not. > P.S. Terry, sorry to be taking out on you a lot > of criticism that could and should be directed at > about 62.7% of the posts on this and related threads. > _____________ > No need to apologize. I'm thankful for your posts and other related > posts. You're seriously too kind. Thanks again, though. Sincerely, Lee From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 16 06:15:17 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 00:15:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: Gary Miller: >So what if we're all on this list and they have Carnivore monitoring >our voice >and data. As long as we are not consorting with known >terrorists, talking >consistently about bombs, Jihad, drugs >(Narcoterrorism), Bin Ladin, etc... Then >the Men in Black will >never show up at our door. I have the impression you don't read or watch the news. Or else the news you do read/watch is highly filtered. It's not a good idea to be at the extreme end of naivety. Reading your words, I'm reminded of this poem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came EFF (www.eff.org) and Declan McCullagh (http://www.politechbot.com/) are sources that can keep you up to date about what your government is doing to you. For example: -------------------------------------------- http://w2.eff.org/effector/20/40.php * EFF Comments on Terror Watch List Since 2003, the government has been building, testing and stitching together several disparate terrorist watch lists from various agencies into one vast, centralized database of suspicious individuals. Information in this database can be used to decide whether individuals will be allowed to enter the country, get on an airplane, or become citizens, or if they will be detained at routine traffic stops. It's a central factor in other programs, like Secure Flight, the Transportation Security Administration's proposed plan to "screen" millions of travelers. Last week, EFF filed comments on some proposed changes to the Terrorist Screening Records System (TSRS), which includes the watch list as well as other records. EFF urged the FBI to reconsider its 2005 decision to exempt the TSRS from crucial Privacy Act requirements, which makes it impossible for citizens to use the courts to access or challenge false or inaccurate data that may have found its way into the system. EFF's full Comments on the Terror Watch List: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/eff-comments-terror-watch-list -------------------------------------------- My previous post was much more about the government money spent for anti-terrorist activities. Your tax money spent, that is, instead of, say research to fight cancer. Your tax money spent to make lists like the Terrorist Watch List and to put you and me and everyone we know on it, so that the next time one wants to take a flight to see Cousin Henry, they will be pulled off of the plane. Or maybe put in prison. You know, for thinking independently. You might be comfortable with such a situation, but I have a real problem with it. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From frankmac at ripco.com Sun Mar 16 06:43:48 2008 From: frankmac at ripco.com (frank McElligott) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 02:43:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; Message-ID: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> During the convention riots in Chicago in 1968, I was arrested, and charged with rioting and something else. The fbi within a week came to where I worked, interviewed my boss and co-workers and left the impression that I was attempting to over thrown the government. A black car was stationed with the two suits for all of two months in front of the house,,, An there were clicks whenever we answered the telephone. Now because 18 guys high jacked four planes, and flew them into three building, my entire world has changed. They are now going though my mail and my garbage they are listening to my telephone, and there is still a black car park in front on the house. I had done the foolish act of going to Istanbul, and marrying a woman who is not a Christian, 1968 2008 what is the changed in my world , nothing, the government is just protecting its ass from me i guess, and until we say enough they will continue protecting their turf. Complaining will not help, bloging will not help, the internet will not help, only when the American people say enough and will be willing to do something about it then the freedoms which people have died for again will live in this country, but until then we will get what we deserve, a crack pot old man from Arizona, a woman who wants to run a country while she could not keep track of her husband predilections, a guy from Chicago, who was absent 70% from his job as a state senator,,, or a guy who paid 80,000 to women for sex, when he could have gone to Moscow and got a lifetime membership to 20 different brothels with 20 times better looking women for 20% of 80,000 From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Sun Mar 16 08:28:02 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:28:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] Rational?? -- Don't make me laugh! Message-ID: <167240.45345.qm@web30406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Bill K mentioned: PREDICTABLY IRRATIONAL The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. By Dan Ariely. 280 pp. Harper/HarperCollins Publishers. $25.95. >A more accurate picture is that there are a bunch of >different versions of you, who come to the fore >under different conditions. We aren't cool >calculators of self-interest who sometimes go crazy; >we're crazies who are, under special circumstances, >sometimes rational. I always appreciate your point of view and find the way you phrase it, noteworthy. Thanks Anna:) Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 11:11:23 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:11:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Religion, Spirituality and the Avatar Message-ID: <470a3c520803160411t3b58aecu98d029d7c051abce@mail.gmail.com> Very interesting seminar on Religion, Spirituality and the Avatar yesterday in Second Life. My report: http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/religion_spirituality_and_the_avatar/ From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 16 13:09:14 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:09:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Amara said << I have the impression you don't read or watch the news. Or else the news you do read/watch is highly filtered. It's not a good idea to be at the extreme end of naivety. Reading your words, I'm reminded of this poem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came EFF (www.eff.org) and Declan McCullagh (http://www.politechbot.com/) are sources that can keep you up to date about what your government is doing to you. For example: -------------------------------------------- http://w2.eff.org/effector/20/40.php * EFF Comments on Terror Watch List Since 2003, the government has been building, testing and stitching together several disparate terrorist watch lists from various agencies into one vast, centralized database of suspicious individuals. Information in this database can be used to decide whether individuals will be allowed to enter the country, get on an airplane, or become citizens, or if they will be detained at routine traffic stops. It's a central factor in other programs, like Secure Flight, the Transportation Security Administration's proposed plan to "screen" millions of travelers. Last week, EFF filed comments on some proposed changes to the Terrorist Screening Records System (TSRS), which includes the watch list as well as other records. EFF urged the FBI to reconsider its 2005 decision to exempt the TSRS from crucial Privacy Act requirements, which makes it impossible for citizens to use the courts to access or challenge false or inaccurate data that may have found its way into the system. EFF's full Comments on the Terror Watch List: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/eff-comments-terror-watch-list -------------------------------------------- My previous post was much more about the government money spent for anti-terrorist activities. Your tax money spent, that is, instead of, say research to fight cancer. Your tax money spent to make lists like the Terrorist Watch List and to put you and me and everyone we know on it, so that the next time one wants to take a flight to see Cousin Henry, they will be pulled off of the plane. Or maybe put in prison. You know, for thinking independently. You might be comfortable with such a situation, but I have a real problem with it. >> I went to your links and read the articles on each site Amara to find out what I have been missing. And since I had already read those articles elsewhere or similar versions of those articles and found no significant details which were missing from the versions I read I am satisfied that the news sources I read regularly are varied enough and are not filtered such that I am not receiving a propagandist view. I agree with the House vetoing immunity for the telecomm companies and think Bush's administration has exceeded it's authority by not forcing judicial approval to insure the each tap for listening is warranted but I most certainly do not feel sorry for an MIT student stupid enough to wear something that looks like a bomb into an airport. If I am in an airport and someone next to me had something that looks like a bomb strapped to the chest I would hope the police take the head shot and find out if the bomb was real afterward before the person has a chance to detonate it. In America everybody wants their 15 seconds of fame. And people stupid enough pull such stunts which have the potential to cause panic and cause people to be killed deserve full prosecution to discourage other idiots from trying to get their names in the paper or thinking they can write a book about it afterwards and get rich from it. I likewise have no sympathy for people who talk about bombs or make terroristic comments on airplanes designed to scare people just because they are mean spirited and then try to hide behind free speech. You are not allowed to yell fire in a hospital or movie theatre. That is just common sense. I think we need to be ever vigilant to prevent any minority group from being singled out and having their rights and property taken away as we did to the Japanese citizens during World War II. That was a dark chapter in our history. And if we were rounding up Muslims and putting them in concentration camps I would be out on the street protesting. But our government has reminded us numerous times that is just a small percentage of fanatical Muslims who believe in Jihad against other religions and that we must not direct our rage against all believer in Islam or people from countries where fundamentalists are the most vocal. I also believe that some people may be unfairly being kept out of the United States due to erroneous information. It is impossible to run a program that large and not make any mistakes. If a person had a close family member who was a terrorist or roomed with or was a known best friend to a terrorist, I would prefer that that individual not be given the privilege to visit the United States. I realize that this person may be completely innocent but entering our country is a privilege just as when I visit any other country and each country has the right to look at the criminal background, any health risks that a visitor may have been exposed to, or any close associations that that may heighten their risk assessment of that individual. Protecting it's citizens is one of the highest responsibilities that a government is charged with. And when our citizens are being kidnapped, bombed, and beheaded, it is our best interests that the government step up that level of protection within reason. From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 16 13:37:41 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:37:41 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten Message-ID: That's a silly policy, but titles still carry some weight in Germany. And usually you need a second PhD (called Habilitation [1]) to teach there, even though some rules at some universities have changed. At the other end of the spectrum is Italy, where one can be called a 'Dr.' after a Laurea degree [2], there is even a shorter Laurea begun in Berlusconi's last period, so one could legally (in Italy) be called a Dr. after just a few years of university. And if you meet an Italian older than their later 50s with a PhD after their name, then they did not earn their PhD in Italy, since the PhD didn't exist (the PhD was offered in Italy starting in the middle 80s). Frau Doktor Graps References [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habilitation [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurea -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 16 13:52:44 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:52:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> Message-ID: <001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Frank said: << During the convention riots in Chicago in 1968, I was arrested, and charged with rioting and something else. The fbi within a week came to where I worked, interviewed my boss and co-workers and left the impression that I was attempting to over thrown the government. A black car was stationed with the two suits for all of two months in front of the house,,, An there were clicks whenever we answered the telephone. Now because 18 guys high jacked four planes, and flew them into three building, my entire world has changed. They are now going though my mail and my garbage they are listening to my telephone, and there is still a black car park in front on the house. I had done the foolish act of going to Istanbul, and marrying a woman who is not a Christian, 1968 2008 what is the changed in my world , nothing, the government is just protecting its ass from me i guess, and until we say enough they will continue protecting their turf. Complaining will not help, bloging will not help, the internet will not help, only when the American people say enough and will be willing to do something about it then the freedoms which people have died for again will live in this country, but until then we will get what we deserve, a crack pot old man from Arizona, a woman who wants to run a country while she could not keep track of her husband predilections, a guy from Chicago, who was absent 70% from his job as a state senator,,, or a guy who paid 80,000 to women for sex, when he could have gone to Moscow and got a lifetime membership to 20 different brothels with 20 times better looking women for 20% of 80,000 >> Frank I believe you when you describe that their was negative fallout from you being in the wrong place at the wrong time. 1968 was a turbulent year and in many cases the government overreacted to protestors and riots were triggered due to lack of police training in how to handle those situations safely without escalating them. Due to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. the whole government was fearing widespread chaos. I have a great deal of respect for those who protested the war peacefully and were driven by their desire for bring us home from Vietnam. All patriots when they decide to protest though must pay a price in their time, energy, and risk. If a riot breaks out and they are swept up in it there are repercussions. I would suggest filing and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and finding out just what all did transpire. They probably will redact anything within the last 7 years but they show you the black where it's been redacted so at least you'll know that something did go on. I also would not be hesitant to go talk to the people in the black car in a friendly manner. Bring them coffee, talk to them, give them your side of what happened. They don't want to be there either. And if they won't talk to you and the car's still there call your local police department with the plate and ask them to verify that the person is not casing the neighborhood for a robbery. It maybe that the neighbor suspects his wife of cheating and is having her watched by a Private investigator. I too am dismayed at the choices we face for our leadership. I personally don't care if a woman chooses to turn her head if her husband is not monogamous all the time women do this everyday. In wealthy circles this is known as an arrangement. Sometimes it is unspoken but both husband and wife accept it. And I do not care if a man feels the need to pay for sex as long as it's not at the taxpayers expense. But I do mind the hypocrisy of toughening the laws against average Joes who visit street hookers while at the same time they are paying $4300 an hour for the same privileges. And I am extremely uncomfortable with a candidate whose church spews such vile Anti-American hatred as Obama's does and then he expects us to believe that he did not know such sermons were being given. This man was his personal friend if these are the things he is telling his congregation in public what is he telling his friend, possibly the future president in private? That's just scary as fuck, I'm sorry! From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 13:57:18 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:57:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Probability is in the mind re free will vs.determinism Message-ID: <8CA5584C82294EA-14A8-452A@webmail-nf11.sim.aol.com> Probability is a thought arising from interactions of thoughts.. Speculations like probability are the products of brain processes evolving from accidents of birth/genes/evolution and quantum randomness. Epicureans and Buddhist philosophers do not believe that brain/mind is static/permanent thing/object. It is a process of change as we all are from birth and beyond. Ideas of free will/probability arise out of fear of the unknown. Why fear death when death is just a concept? In the final analysis, we are all changing forms of energy which can neither be created nor destroyed. Some thoughts live on after the physical matter changes from solid to quantum bits. Information, thoughts/ideas are preserved in books/computers and internet. Thoughts were once products of consciousness, brain/mind activity. Terry From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 14:26:14 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:26:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Brian Atkins wrote: > Kaj Sotala wrote: > > > > others, when there's less competition. Though I can't, from the top of > > my head, come up with anything that you'd be competing for that you > > could achieve when the others were sleeping (I momentarily thought > > Haven't you heard, nightfolk get more ... er, fun. ;-) Mmhhh, not when they have to wake up in the morning... :-) I am very sensitive to this issue, because while I have never been insomniac (I usually fall asleep as soon as I hit the bed) it appears that my biological clock is regulated on a day of 25 hours, meaning that I have to adjust to a one-hour jet-lag each and every day. Not too pleasant indeed. In fact, I love when I travel westward, because for a while my suffering is decreased for a while... Stefano.Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 14:30:45 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:30:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803151103o799ee6f8w420438fccc0c1c32@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803151103o799ee6f8w420438fccc0c1c32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803160730o64b0e965r48021398e5bce466@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 7:03 PM, John Grigg wrote: > At least seven U.S. citizens working as researchers in Germany have faced > criminal probes in recent months for using the title "Dr." on their business > cards, Web sites and r??sum??s. They all hold doctoral degrees from elite > universities back home. > > Under a little-known Nazi-era law, only people who earn PhDs or medical > degrees in Germany are allowed to use "Dr." as a courtesy title. > > The law was modified in 2001 to extend the privilege to degree-holders from > any country in the European Union. But docs from the United States and > anywhere else outside Europe are still forbidden to use the honorific. > Violators can face a year behind bars. Strictly speaking, I believe that Italian rules are pretty analogous. E.g., a US lawyer can define himself an attorney-at-law, but is in principle legally prevented from translating that title in the Italian equivalent of "procuratore legale" or "avvocato". The difference is that we do not take our rules so seriously as Germans do. :-) Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 14:43:24 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:43:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <580930c20803160743j5ed9ef34j99f4745b9e54f832@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > At the other end of the spectrum is Italy, where one can be called a > 'Dr.' after a Laurea degree [2], there is even a shorter Laurea begun in > Berlusconi's last period, so one could legally (in Italy) be called a > Dr. after just a few years of university. And if you meet an Italian > older than their later 50s with a PhD after their name, then they did > not earn their PhD in Italy, since the PhD didn't exist (the PhD was > offered in Italy starting in the middle 80s). Yes. I am not sure about the new short courses, but all and every old university degree were "doctorates" in Italian, in the very spirit of the Spanish king who rather than abolishing nobility at a point in time declared "todos caballeros", meaning that every citizen had been automatically knighted. :-) In fact, it is quite funny that when asking for an espresso in bar, one gets often the reply "there it is, doctor" even though the waiter hasn't the foggiest idea of what kind of education (primary school?) his patron may have completed. There is something however where Italy and the US are similar, namely the fact that owing to the fact that American law schools, being postgraduate, started in the XX century to call their degree JD (juris doctor, or doctor in law), in both countries paradoxically a law student become a Doctor first and a Master (more specifically, LLM., legum magister, master of law) later on, while this would not make any sense in France, Germany or the UK, where the progression is bacherlor/licensee, master, doctor in all fields. Lastly, to be called doctor is a very umpleasant experience for an Italian lawyer, since it reminds you of your period of statutory training when you had not passed the bar yet, and thus people could not call you "attorney"... :-) All in all, I think I would gladly reserve the title of Dr. as a courtesy prefix to MDs... Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 15:01:27 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:01:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography Message-ID: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> Dear Friends, As mentioned a few months ago, in the framework of an AITproject aimed at contributing to the knowledge and study of transhumanist ideas in Italy and worldwide, we have worked for some time now to an ambitious Universal Transhumanist Bibliography, which include essays (and a few literary works) *published in volume* and *currently in print*, either on transhumanism, or on subjects to some extent or other related to its main interests and themes (the latter can be omitted in the database online version). This is of course a work in progress and far from complete. The database developed so far can be consulted and extracted according to all criteria we could think of on the Website of the association, along with a description of the book in the original language, keywords and some brief comments by ourselves in Italian, plus the links to purchase the book and to its Web site or full-text online version, if any. I thought however it could be of interest to circulate the current bare-bone list, especially in view of any contribution of additional items that anybody may be willing to offer. The books that are hostile, sometimes vehemently hostile, are marked with a full yellow mark. The stars represent our own rating in terms of relevance, and you can then find the original title, the name of the author(s) or editor(s), the publisher, the possible translation in Italian together with the latter's details. Lastly, "H+" or "C" indicate whether it is a work on transhumanism or simply more or less vaguely connected to typical H+ concerns. Enjoy! And... those who can demonstrably claim to be conversant with all the texts listed below win a free full membership in the AIT for 2008. :-))) [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 1 - *Ed.orig.*: The Scientific Conquest of Death, AA.VV. The Immortalist Institute by Libros en Red [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 2 - *Ed.orig.*: The Wellborn Science. Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil and Russia, Mark B. Adams Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 3 - *Ed.orig.*: Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion. A Raucous Tour of Cloning, Transhumanism, and the New Era of Immortality, Brian Alexander Basic Books / Perseus Book Group [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 4 - *Ed.orig.*: Dr. Atkins' Health Revolution: How Complementary Medicine can Extend Your Life, Robert C. Atkins (1990) Bantam [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 5 - *Ed.orig.*: Posthumanism (Readers in Cultural Criticism), Neil Badmington (Editor) (2000) Palgrave Macmillan 2000 [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 6 - *Ed.orig.*: Biotecnolog?a y posthumanismo, Jes?s Ballesteros, Encarnaci?n Fern?ndez (2006) Aranzadi [espa?ol] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 7 - *Ed.orig.*: L'epoca del postumano. Lezione magistrale per il compleanno di Pietro Ingrao, Pietro Barcellona (2007) Citt? Aperta [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 8 - *Ed.orig.*: Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz, David M. Berube (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 9 - *Ed.orig.*: Genome. The Story of the Most Astonishing Scientific Adventure of Our Time: the Attempt to Map All the Genes in the Human Body, Jerry E. Bishop, Michael Waldholz Simon & Schuster [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 10 - *Ed.orig.*: Futuro biologico, Walter F. Bodmer e Alan Jones Bollati Boringhier [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 11 - *Ed.orig.*: Genetics, Evolution and Man, Walter F. Bodmer (1976) Freeman [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] **** 12 - *Ed.orig.*: L'invasione delle nanotecnologie. Cosa sono e come funzionano i nuovi microrobot invisibili che colonizzeranno il mondo, Niels Boeing (2006) Orme Editori [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 13 - * Ed.orig.*: Science, Seeds and Cyborgs: Biotechnology and the Appropriation of Life, Finn Bowring (2003) Verso [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 14 - *Ed.orig.*: The Next Fifty Years, Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century, John Brockman, ed. (2002) Edge by Vintage Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 15 - *Ed.orig.*: What We Believe but Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty, John Brockman (2006) Edge by Harper Perennial [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 16 - *Ed.orig.*: Intelligent Thought: Science versus the Intelligent Design Movement, John Brockman, ed. (2006) Edge by Random House [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 17 - *Ed.orig.*: What Is Your Dangerous Idea?: Today's Leading Thinkers on the Unthinkable, John Brockman (2007) Harper Perennial [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] * 18 - *Ed.orig.*: Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution, John Brockman, ed. (1996) Touchstone [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 19 - *Ed.orig.*: The Spike: How Our Lives Are Being Transformed By Rapidly Advancing Technologies, Damien Broderick (2002) Tor Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 20 - *Ed.orig.*: Flesh and Machines: How Robots Will Change Us, Rodney Brooks (2002) Pantheon [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 21 - *Ed.orig.*: Our Miracle Called Louise. A Parents' Story, Leslie e John Brown (1979) Paddington Press [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] **** 22 - *Ed.orig.*: The Survival Imperative: Using Space to Protect Earth, William E. Burrows (2005) Oxford University Press, USA [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 23 - *Ed.orig.*: Plants, Power and Profit. Social, Economical and Ethical Consequences of the New Biotechnologies, Lawrence Busch et al. (1991) Basil Blackwell [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 24 - *Ed.orig.*: Etica della scienza pura, Riccardo Campa (2007) Sestante Edizioni [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 25 - *Ed.orig.*: Il corpo tecnologico. L'influenza delle tecnologie sul corpo e sulle sue facolt?, Pier Luigi Capucci (1994) Baskerville [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 26 - *Ed.orig.*: Il cyborg. Saggio sull'uomo artificiale, Antonio Caronia (2001) Shake [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 27 - *Ed.orig.*: Les ann?es Faust, ou La science face au vieillissement, Yves Christen (1991) Sand [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 28 - *Ed.orig.*: Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence, Andy Clark (2004) Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 29 - *Ed.orig.*: Human Dignity in the Biotech Century: A Christian Vision for Public Policy, Charles W. Colson (Editor), Nigel M. De S. Cameron (Editor), Nigel M. De S. Cameron (Editor) (2004) InterVarsity Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 30 - *Ed.orig.*: Corpo e tecnologie. Rappresentazioni e immaginari, Mariella Combi (2000) Meltemi [italiano] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 31 - *Ed.orig.*: The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins (2006) Houghton Mifflin [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 32 - *Ed.orig.*: The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution, Richard Dawkins (2005) Mariner Books [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] **** 33 - *Ed.orig.*: Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life, Daniel C. Dennett (1996) Simon & Schuster [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 34 - *Ed.orig.*: Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Daniel C. Dennett (2007) Penguin [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 35 - *Ed.orig.*: The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes and Its Implications, David Deutsch (1998) Penguin [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] * 36 - * Ed.orig.*: Guiding Icarus: Merging Bioethics with Corporate Interests, Rahul K. Dhanda (2002) Wiley-Liss [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 37 - *Ed.orig.*: Technophobia!: Science Fiction Visions of Posthuman Technology, Daniel Dinello (2006) University of Texas Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 38 - *Ed.orig.*: Supermen: Tales of the Posthuman Future, Gardner Dozois (2002) St. Martin's Griffin [english] - narrativa, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 39 - *Ed.orig.*: Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology, Eric Drexler (1987) Anchor [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 40 - *Ed.orig.*: Schild's Ladder, Greg Egan (2003) Eos [english] *Ed.ita.*: La scala di Schild (2004) Mondadori - narrativa, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 41 - *Ed.orig.*: Permutation City, Greg Egan (1995) Eos [italiano] *Ed.ita.*: Permutation City (1998) Shake - narrativa, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 42 - *Ed.orig.*: Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, Eric Drexler and Chris Peterson (1993) Quill [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 43 - *Ed.orig.*: Man into Superman: The Startling Potential of Human Evolution - and How to Be Part of It, Robert C.W. Ettinger (2005) Ria University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 44 - *Ed.orig.*: The Prospect of Immortality, Robert C.W. Ettinger (2005) Ria University Press [english] *Ed.ita.*: Ibernazione, nuova era. La prospettiva dell'immortalit? (1967) Rizzoli - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 45 - *Ed.orig.*: Pour en finir avec le nihilisme, Heidegger et la question de la technique, Guillaume Faye (1980) Nouvelle Ecole [fran?ais] *Ed.ita.*: Per farla finita con il nichilismo. Heidegger e la questione della tecnica (2007) SEB - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 46 - *Ed.orig.*: L'arch?ofuturisme, Guillaume Faye (1998) Editions de l'Aencre [fran?ais] *Ed.ita.*: Archeofuturismo (1999) Societ? Editrice Barbarossa - saggistica, C [image: ostile] *** 47 - *Ed.orig.*: Umano, post-umano. Potere, sapere, etica nell'et? globale, Maria Paola Fimiani (2004) Editori Riuniti [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 48 - *Ed.orig.*: The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, Ronald A. Fisher (2000) Oxford University Press [italiano] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 49 - *Ed.orig.*: Nanotechnology: Science, Innovation, and Opportunity, Lynn E. Foster (2005) Prentice Hall PTR [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 50 - *Ed.orig.*: Mechanical Bodies, Computational Minds: Artificial Intelligence from Automata to Cyborgs, Stefano Franchi (2005) The MIT Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 51 - *Ed.orig.*: Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, Francis Fukuyama (2003) Picador [english] *Ed.ita.*: L'uomo oltre l'uomo. Le conseguenze della rivoluzione biotecnologica (2002) Mondadori - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 52 - *Ed.orig.*: Bioevolution. How Biotechnology Is Changing the World, Michael Fumento (2003) Encounter Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 53 - *Ed.orig.*: Fabbricare l'uomo. L'eugenetica tra biologia e ideologia, Christian Fuschetto (2004) Armando Editore [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 54 - *Ed.orig.*: The Intelligent Universe: AI, ET, and the Emerging Mind of the Cosmos, James N. Gardner (2007) New Page Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 55 - *Ed.orig.*: Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies -- and What It Means to Be Human, Joel Garreau (2006) Broadway [english] *Ed.ita.*: Radical evolution (2007) Sperling & Kupfer - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] **** 56 - *Ed.orig.*: Fecondazione extra-corporea. Pro o contro l'uomo?, Giuseppe Garrone (a cura di), (2001) Gribaudi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 57 - *Ed.orig.*: Urmensch und Sp?tkultur. Philosophische Ergebnisse und Aussagen, Arnold Gehlen Klostermann [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: Le origini dell'uomo e la tarda cultura Il Saggiatore - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 58 - *Ed.orig.*: Die Seele im technischen Zeitalter, Arnold Gehlen (1982) Rowohlt TB-V [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: L'uomo nell'era della tecnica. Problemi socio-psicologici della societ? industriale (2003) SugarCo - saggistica, C [image: ostile] ** 59 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital Soul: Intelligent Machines and Human Values, Thomas M. Georges (2003) Westview Press [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 60 - *Ed.orig.*: Faster: The Acceleration of Just About Everything, James Gleick (2000) Vintage [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 61 - *Ed.orig.*: Cyborg Citizen: Politics in the Posthuman Age, Chris Habl Gray (2002) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 62 - *Ed.orig.*: The Cyborg Handbook, Chris Gray (1995) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 63 - *Ed.orig.*: Babies by Design: The Ethics of Genetic Choice, Ronald M. Green (2007) Yale University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 64 - *Ed.orig.*: Ending Aging: The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging in Our Lifetime, Aubrey de Grey, Michael Rae (2007) St. Martin's Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 65 - *Ed.orig.*: The Baby Boomers' Guide to Living Forever, Terry Grossman (2000) Hubristic Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 66 - *Ed.orig.*: Being Well Born. An Introduction to Heredity and Eugenics, Michael F. Guyer (2003) Kessinger Publishing [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] ***** 67 - *Ed.orig.*: Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik?, J?rgen Habermas (2005) Suhrkamp Verlag [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: Il futuro della natura umana: i rischi di una genetica liberale(2002) Einaudi - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 68 - *Ed.orig.*: Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind, Moravec (2006) Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 69 - *Ed.orig.*: Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, Donna J. Haraway (1991) Routledge [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 70 - *Ed.orig.*: Prenatal Diagnosis and Selective Abortion, Harry Harris Harvard University Press [english] *Ed.ita.*: Diagnosi prenatale e aborto selettivo Einaudi - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 71 - *Ed.orig.*: Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People, John Harris (2007) Princeton University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 72 - *Ed.orig.*: Vortr?ge und Aufs?tze, Martin Heidegger (2000) Klett-Cotta [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: Saggi e discorsi (1991) Mursia - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 73 - *Ed.orig.*: Citizen Cyborg, James J. Hughes (2004) Westview Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 74 - *Ed.orig.*: The Brave New World, Aldous Huxley (1998) Harper [english] *Ed.ita.*: Mondo nuovo e ritorno al mondo nuovo (2006) Mondadori - narrativa, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 75 - *Ed.orig.*: Eloge de la difference, Albert Jacquard (1981) Seuil [fran?ais] *Ed.ita.*: Elogio della differenza (1982) Nuova Universale Capelli - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 76 - *Ed.orig.*: Der Arbeiter. Herrschaft und Gestalt, Ernst J?nger (1982) Klett-Cotta [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: L'operaio. Forma e dominio (2004) Guanda - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] * 77 - *Ed.orig.*: Visions. How Science Will Revolutionize the 21st Century and Beyond, Michio Kaku (1999) Oxford Paperbacks [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 78 - *Ed.orig.*: Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics, Leon R. Kass (2004) Encounter Books [english] *Ed.ita.*: La sfida della bioetica. La vita, la libert? e la difesa della dignit? umana (2007) Lindau - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 79 - *Ed.orig.*: Human Cloning and Human Dignity. The Report of the President's Council on Bioethics, Leon R. Kass (2002) Publicaffairs/Perseus Books Group [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ** 80 - *Ed.orig.*: Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness, Leon R. Kass (2003) Harper Perennia [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 81 - *Ed.orig.*: Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems and the Economic World, Kevin Kelly (1995) Perseus Books Group [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 82 - *Ed.orig.*: La r?volution biolithique. Humains artificiels et machines anim?es, Herv? Kempf (1998) Albin Michel [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] * 83 - *Ed.orig.*: Basic Questions on Genetics, Stem Cell Research and Cloning: Are These Technologies Okay to Use?, John Kilner (2002) Kregel Publications [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 84 - *Ed.orig.*: Stem Cell Century: Law and Policy for a Breakthrough Technology, Russell Korobkin (2007) Yale University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 85 - *Ed.orig.*: L'Affaire Lyssenko, Jo?l et Dan Kotek (1986) ?ditions Complexe [fran?ais] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 86 - *Ed.orig.*: Beyond Earth: The Future of Humans in Space, Bob Krone (2006) Collector's Guide Publishing Inc [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 87 - *Ed.orig.*: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , Thomas Kuhn (1996) University Of Chicago Press [english] *Ed.ita.*: La struttura delle rivoluzioni scientifiche (2000) Einaudi - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 88 - *Ed.orig.*: The Singularity Is Near. When Human Transcend Biology, Ray Kurzweil (2005) Viking [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 89 - *Ed.orig.*: Are We Spiritual Machines?: Ray Kurzweil vs. the Critics of Strong A.I., Ray Kurzweil (2001) Discovery Institute [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 90 - *Ed.orig.*: The Age of the Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence, Ray Kurzweil (2000) Penguin [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 91 - *Ed.orig.*: Fantastic Voyage. Live Long Enough to Live Forever, Ray Kurzweil (2004) Rodale Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 92 - *Ed.orig.*: The Age of Intelligent Machines, Ray Kurzweil (1992) The MIT Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 93 - *Ed.orig.*: The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design, Leonard Susskind (2005) Little, Brown and Company [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] * 94 - *Ed.orig.*: Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes On the Cosmos, Seth Lloyd (2006) Knopf [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 95 - *Ed.orig.*: Il simbionte. Prove di umanit? futura, Giuseppe O. Longo (2003) Meltemi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 96 - *Ed.orig.*: Homo technologicus, Giuseppe O. Longo (2005) Meltemi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 97 - *Ed.orig.*: Post-Human. Verso nuovi modelli di esistenza, Roberto Marchesini (2002) Bollati Boringhieri [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 98 - *Ed.orig.*: Teoria e invenzione futurista, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti Mondadori [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 99 - *Ed.orig.*: Bioethics: The Ethics of Evolution and Genetic Interference, H. F. Matare (1999) Bergin & Garvey [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] * 100 - *Ed.orig.*: The Fourth Discontinuity: The Co-Evolution of Humans and Machines, Bruce Mazlish (1995) Yale University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] ***** 101 - *Ed.orig.*: Enough : Staying Human in an Engineered Age, Bill McKibben (2004) Owl Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 102 - *Ed.orig.*: Robo sapiens: Evolution of a New Species, Peter Menzel (2001) The MIT Press [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 103 - *Ed.orig.*: The Emotion Machine: Commonsense Thinking, Artificial Intelligence, and the Future of the Human Mind, Marvin Minsky (2006) Simon & Schuster [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 104 - *Ed.orig.*: Society of Mind, Marvin Minsky (1988) Simon & Schuster [english] *Ed.ita.*: La societ? della mente (1989) Adelphi - saggistica, C [image: ostile] *** 105 - *Ed.orig.*: Maschera e volto degli OGM. Fatti e misfatti degli organismi geneticamente modificati, Giovanni Monastra Edizioni Settimo Sigillo [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 106 - *Ed.orig.*: Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence, Hans Moravec (1990) Harvard University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 107 - *Ed.orig.*: The Science of Staying Young, John Morley, Sheri R. Colberg (2007) McGraw-Hill [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 108 - *Ed.orig.*: More than Human. Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement, Ramez Naam (2005) Broadway [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 109 - *Ed.orig.*: Evolution, Genetics and Eugenics, Horatio H. Newman (1970) Greenwood Press Reprint [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 110 - *Ed.orig.*: Also sprach Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche (2005) Anaconda [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: Cos? parl? Zarathustra (2008) Rizzoli - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] **** 111 - *Ed.orig.*: Die fr?hliche Wissenschaft, Friedrich Nietzsche (2007) Anaconda [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: La gaia scienza (2007) Barbera - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 112 - *Ed.orig.*: L'uomo e i sentieri della tecnica: Heidegger, Gehlen, Marcuse, Maria Teresa Pansera (1998) Armando Editore [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 113 - *Ed.orig.*: Viroid Life: Perspectives on Nietzsche and the Transhuman Condition, Ansell Pearson (1997) Routledge [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] **** 114 - *Ed.orig.*: Biotechnology and the Human Good, C. Ben Mitchell, Edmund D. Pellegrino, Jean Bethke Elshtai, John Frederic Kilner, Scott B. Rae (2007) Georgetown University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 115 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital People: From Bionic Humans to Androids, Sidney Perkowitz (2005) Joseph Henry Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 116 - *Ed.orig.*: Digital People: From Bionic Humans to Androids, Sidney Perkowitz (2004) Joseph Henry Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 117 - *Ed.orig.*: Il sex appeal dell'inorganico, Mario Perniola (1994) Einaudi [italiano] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 118 - *Ed.orig.*: Pedagogia e post-umano. Ibridazioni identitarie e frontiere del possibile, Minerva Franca Pinto-Gallelli Rosa (2004) Carocci [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 119 - *Ed.orig.*: Post-umano. Relazioni tra uomo e tecnologia nella societ? delle reti, Mario Pireddu, Antonio Tursi (a cura di) (2006) Guerini e Associati [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 120 - *Ed.orig.*: African American Bioethics: Culture, Race, and Identity, Lawrence J., Jr., M.d. Prograis (Editor), Edmund D. Pellegrino (Editor) (2007) Georgetown University Press [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] *** 121 - *Ed.orig.*: Our Final Century, Martin Rees Arrow Books [english] *Ed.ita.*: Il secolo finale. Perch? l'umanit? rischia di autodistruggersi nei prossimi cento anni Mondadori - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] **** 122 - *Ed.orig.*: Francis Crick: Discoverer of the Genetic Code, Matt Ridley (2006) Eminent Lives [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] ***** 123 - *Ed.orig.*: The Biotech Century, Jeremy Rifkin (1999) Phoenix [english] *Ed.ita.*: Il secolo biotech. Il commercio genetico e l'inizio di una nuova era (2003) Baldini Castoldi - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 124 - *Ed.orig.*: Who Should Play God? The Artificial Creation of Life and What it Means for the Future of the Human Race, Jeremy Rifkin e Ted Howard (1977) Dell Publishing Co. [english] *Ed.ita.*: Giocare alla divinit? (1980) Feltrinelli - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 125 - *Ed.orig.*: The Future of the Brain: The Promise and Perils of Tomorrow's Neuroscience, Steven Rose (2005) Oxford University Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 126 - *Ed.orig.*: Filosofo cyberpunk, Rudy Rucker (2000) Di Renzo Editore [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 127 - *Ed.orig.*: Biotechnology: Science, Engineering, and Ethical Challenges for the Twenty-First Century, Frederick B. Rudolph, Larry V. McIntyre, ed. (1996) Joseph Henry Press [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] *** 128 - *Ed.orig.*: The Case against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering, Michael J. Sandel (2007) Belknap Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 129 - *Ed.orig.*: The Dance of the Molecules: How Nanotechnology is Changing Our Lives, Ted Sargent (2006) Thunder's Mouth Press [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 130 - *Ed.orig.*: Mindscan, Robert J. Sawyer (2005) Tor Science Fiction [english] *Ed.ita.*: Mindscan (2006) Urania, Mondadori, n. 1525 - narrativa, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 131 - *Ed.orig.*: Storia e destino, Aldo Schiavone (2007) Einaudi [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 132 - *Ed.orig.*: Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise, and Energy in the Human Settlement of Space, Harrison H. Schmitt (2006) Springer [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ** 133 - *Ed.orig.*: Remaking Eden, Lee M. Silver (1998) Harper Perennial [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 134 - *Ed.orig.*: Nicht gerettet. Versuche nach Heidegger, Peter Sloterdijk (2001) Suhrkamp Verlag [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: Non siamo ancora stati salvati. Saggi dopo Heidegger (2004) Bompiani - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 135 - *Ed.orig.*: Der Mensch und die Technik. Beitrag zu einer Philosophie des Lebens, Oswald Spengler C.H. Beck Verlag [deutsch] *Ed.ita.*: L'uomo e la macchina Settimo Sigillo - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 136 - *Ed.orig.*: God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist, Victor J Stenger (2007) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] * 137 - *Ed.orig.*: Tomorrow Now: Envisioning the Next 50 Years, Bruce Sterling (2003) Random House [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 138 - *Ed.orig.*: Redesigning Humans, Gregory Stock (2002) Houghton Mifflin [english] *Ed.ita.*: Riprogettare gli esseri umani. L'impatto dell'ingegneria genetica sul destino biologico della nostra specie (2005) Orme Editori - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 139 - *Ed.orig.*: Nanofuture: What's Next For Nanotechnology, Josh Storrs Hall (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 140 - *Ed.orig.*: Les utopies posthumaines. Contre-culture, cyberculture, culture du caos, R?mi Sussan (2005) Omniscience [fran?ais] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] **** 141 - *Ed.orig.*: La filosofia del postumano, Roberto Terrosi (1997) Costa & Nolan [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 142 - *Ed.orig.*: Biopolitica. Il nuovo paradigma, Stefano Vaj (2005) SEB [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] *** 143 - *Ed.orig.*: La fecondazione proibita, Chiara Valentini (2005) Feltrinelli [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 144 - *Ed.orig.*: Cyberpunk. Antologia di scritti politici, Raf Valvola Scelsi (2007) Shake Edizioni [italiano] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 145 - *Ed.orig.*: La recherche et la technologie, enjeux de puissance, David W. Versailles, Val?rie Merindol, Patrice Cardot (2003) Economica [fran?ais] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] *** 146 - *Ed.orig.*: True Names: And the Opening of the Cyberspace Frontier, Vernor Vinge (2001) Tor Books [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] * 147 - *Ed.orig.*: From Human to Posthuman: Christian Theology And Technology in a Postmodern World, Brent Waters (2006) Ashgate Publishing [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: ostile] *** 148 - *Ed.orig.*: The Island of Dr. Moreau, Herbert G. Wells Tor Classics [english] *Ed.ita.*: L'isola del dottor Moreau (2003) Mursia - narrativa, H+ [image: ostile] * 149 - *Ed.orig.*: Prometheus Rising, Robert Anton Wilson (1992) New Falcon Publications [english] - saggistica, C [image: positivo o neutro] ***** 150 - *Ed.orig.*: A New Kind of Science, Stephen Wolfram (2002) Wolfram, Inc. [english] - saggistica, C [image: ostile] **** 151 - *Ed.orig.*: El cuerpo transformado. Cyborgs y nuestra descendencia tecnol?gica en la realidad y en la ciencia ficci?n, Naief Yehya (2001) Paidos Mexicana [espa?ol] *Ed.ita.*: Homo cyborg. Il corpo postumano tra realt? e fantascienza (2004) Eleuthera - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] * 152 - *Ed.orig.*: Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto, Simon Young (2005) Prometheus Books [english] - saggistica, H+ [image: positivo o neutro] ** 153 - *Ed.orig.*: Entering Space: Creating a Spacefaring Civilization, Robert Zubrin (2000) Tarcher [english] - saggistica, H+ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 16:14:30 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:14:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I need to remind everyone (whether they need it or not)(as I say > "I need") that developing a genetic explanation always requires > a selective advantage, and since we seem to have here an > equilibrium, it's that which needs to be explained too. E.g., > what if there are too many early risers, how does that increase > the number of viable offspring of the late risers and vice-versa. What about simply, the early birds take the early shift and the night owls take the late shift? Between the two, you cover a larger set of hours, get more accomplished and have someone on deck either protecting the tribe or getting stuff done. That's how it is in our house. (I'm the night owl, BTW, although that's only in comparison to my spouse.) PJ From pjmanney at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 16:15:58 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:15:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803160915s6647f9eye87dcc857d5bd167@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > I am very sensitive to this issue, because while I have never been > insomniac (I usually fall asleep as soon as I hit the bed) it appears > that my biological clock is regulated on a day of 25 hours, meaning > that I have to adjust to a one-hour jet-lag each and every day. Not > too pleasant indeed. > > In fact, I love when I travel westward, because for a while my > suffering is decreased for a while... You are simply sensitive to how we are really wired. Without the sun as a cue, individuals vary in circadian rhythm length, with a median of a 25 hour cycle: http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/07.15/bioclock24.html Without my lark husband and kids to wake me, I would revert to my usual night owl behavior, about an hour later every night, until I reach a 2 - 3 am bedtime. Then I collapse. PJ From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 16 16:28:44 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:28:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.co m> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> Interesting list. You note: "This is of course a work in progress and far from complete." I don't see: *anything* by Yudkowsky! [or does "published in volume and currently in print" mean that salient work freely available on the web is excluded? that is, does "in volume" mean "in *a* volume"/"in a paper book" and not "only available in very limited numbers"?] Ed Regis, Great Mambo Chicken and the Transhuman Condition (1991) [a key historical text] Damien Broderick, The Last Mortal Generation (1999) Damien Broderick, Transcension (2002) [but sf by Greg Egan is listed] From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 16:42:03 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:42:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] "What is your dangerous Idea?" {Compatibilism?} Message-ID: <8CA559BCC081068-14A8-490E@webmail-nf11.sim.aol.com> Dangerous is in the eye of the beholder so to speak. Perceptions of what is dangerous again is using a map to navigate reality/truth. The seven social sins arise from a mind believing in free will and a permanent being. In science, investigating and discovering the fabric of reality{ brain/mind} for instance is a continuous process. Theists believed some scientific discoveries are dangerous, meaning contrary to theistic beliefs of a permanent universal truth. Conflicting thoughts i.e. science vs. religion, beliefs vs. facts persist today in some society of minds. Atheists are seen as dangerous by theists and some atheists see religious beliefs are dangerous if imposed in educational institution so that we have the separation of church and state. People who believed in compatibility wanted peace but beliefs paradoxically caused chaos within the society of minds. In science there are no beliefs just skepticism/inquiry via objective observation and hands on experience/testing. Believing in unbeliefs is also a belief i.e. believing in compatibilism without actual facts to back it up. So science and religion is not compatible in nature for the latter is against nature itself. Terry From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 16 16:15:44 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:15:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> Message-ID: <200803161642.m2GGgPHB017181@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > frank McElligott ... > ...but until then we will get what we deserve, a > crack pot old man from Arizona, a woman who wants to run a > country while she could not keep track of her husband > predilections, a guy from Chicago, who was absent 70% from > his job as a state senator... In the 08 US presidential election, there are three choices left. Voters must choose to be either a sexist, a racist or a republicanist. spike From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Mar 16 16:23:06 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:23:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> <001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Gary Miller" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 6:52 AM ...> And I am extremely uncomfortable with a candidate whose church spews such vile Anti-American hatred as Obama's does and then he expects us to believe that he did not know such sermons were being given. This man was his personal friend if these are the things he is telling his congregation in public what is he telling his friend, possibly the future president in private? That's just scary as fuck, I'm sorry! Vile anti-American hatred? I take it you haven't been in a "black" inner-city church service lately or are not familiar with them in the least? Inflammatory thetoric in those kind of churches is prevalent, part of the show. However, while they may exagerrate for effect sometimes, the rhetoric isn't always wrong. Martin Luther King preached this in a sermon (about the Vietnam war) in 1967" : "Don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as His divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America: 'You are too arrogant! If you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power." Cf. to what Jeremiah Wright said (2003 sermon): "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme." Jeremiah Wright said (2001 sermon): "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards ..." Olga neutered themselves From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 16:46:43 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:46:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> Damien Broderick wrote: I don't see: *anything* by Yudkowsky! [or does "published in volume and currently in print" mean that salient work freely available on the web is excluded? that is, does "in volume" mean "in *a* volume"/"in a paper book" and not "only available in very limited numbers"?] >>>>> And what about Anders Sandberg? Or Max More and Natasha Vita-More? John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 16:56:57 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:56:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803160956w3cf1cd7cqae83415d7a507a69@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Interesting list. You note: "This is of course a work in progress and > far from complete." > I don't see: > *anything* by Yudkowsky! [or does "published in volume and currently > in print" mean that salient work freely available on the web is > excluded? that is, does "in volume" mean "in *a* volume"/"in a paper > book" and not "only available in very limited numbers"?] Yes. The self-imposed limitation should read "published as the main content of a paper book, which be not out-of-print at the time of its inclusion", arbitrary as it obviously is. If on the other hand a text is also available full-text on the Web, or, say, published as well in a paper antology, that's fine. We were initially reluctant to include fiction - not because it is not worth doing, but merely to concentrate our efforts and... leave something to do to other H+ groups... :-) - but at the end of the day we decided to do it. Admittedly, however, the fiction section is by far the weakest. Needless to say, we are perfectly aware that many seminal works on transhumanism or of primary importance to H+ ideas may have been published as articles on reviews, magazines and newspapers / only on the Web / as blog entries. But there again, to list as well all that stuff is a work for another day. Some of us, in fact, insisted that we also include movies, and we chose not to do that either. > Ed Regis, Great Mambo Chicken and the Transhuman Condition (1991) [a > key historical text] > > Damien Broderick, The Last Mortal Generation (1999) > > Damien Broderick, Transcension (2002) [but sf by Greg Egan is listed] Due note taken, thank you very much. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 17:03:48 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:03:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803160915s6647f9eye87dcc857d5bd167@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> <29666bf30803160915s6647f9eye87dcc857d5bd167@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803161003j5e908315hf679b59f53178588@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:15 PM, PJ Manney wrote: > You are simply sensitive to how we are really wired. Without the sun > as a cue, individuals vary in circadian rhythm length, with a median > of a 25 hour cycle: > http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/07.15/bioclock24.html Thank you. Very interesting. I should perhaps spend more time in the sun (and in darkness at night...). :-) > > Without my lark husband and kids to wake me, I would revert to my > usual night owl behavior, about an hour later every night, until I > reach a 2 - 3 am bedtime. Then I collapse. > So do I, but simply because my job requires my waking up relatively early in the morning. I am left in peace, I go on shifting until I end up going to bed in late morning, afternoon, early in the evening and then up to another cycle again... :-) I gave it a try once, on vacation, in happier times, and I was actually much better on a 25 hours cycle. Perhaps I should give permanent melatonin supplementation a try. Of find another, better-syncronised planet or habitat... :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 17:08:57 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:08:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803161008o1f48c5c8h8cd5f2b0f3e15331@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:46 PM, John Grigg wrote: > > And what about Anders Sandberg? Or Max More and Natasha Vita-More? > I know that Natasha is writing a book (a thesis, actually) on transhumanism, but I would be deeply grateful if anybody could send me, privately or on the list, the Amazon links of any available books that you feel should be included. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sm at vreedom.com Sun Mar 16 17:37:34 2008 From: sm at vreedom.com (Stephan Magnus) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:37:34 -0000 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803151103o799ee6f8w420438fccc0c1c32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: OK, off course this is silly. But, just as an idea that it isn?t that perfect the other way round, just my experience with business administration: Germany has now mostly switched to the BA/MBA-System following the Bologna-Decisions. Therefore I would think that I can now use the new titles as a substitute for my old one (the degree I got 17 years ago). I cannot. Silly Germans that they accepted this . . . Let me explain: The old system in Germany was: 13 years of school, then at the university at least two years to get an Vordiplom (Pre-Diploma) in economics, then at least two years to get an Diploma in Business Administration. That?s what I got. A ?Dipl. Kfm?. In the same time someone from the US would have a PhD and teaching at the university himself. Now we have Bologna and you would think that the ?old? degrees would translate like this to the ?new? ones: Vordiplom = BA and Diplom = MBA. After that Dr./PhD This way my degree - which is the highest university-degree except the Doktor - would translate to the highest new degree. It doesn?t! If I want to make a PhD I have to start again going to university and make an MBA!!!! Because after the Bologna-Decisions no international university in Europe accepts the old German degree! Even better: If I would like to make a Doktor at some other university in Europe, I can?t! Because you need an MBA for that. I liked the idea to have one kind of system to have easy international interchange. But are we nuts to kick ourselves out of the system? Stephan www.Vreedom.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Mar 16 17:40:58 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:40:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.co m> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 11:46 AM 3/16/2008, you wrote: >Damien Broderick wrote: >I don't see: > >*anything* by Yudkowsky! [or does "published in volume and currently >in print" mean that salient work freely available on the web is >excluded? that is, does "in volume" mean "in *a* volume"/"in a paper >book" and not "only available in very limited numbers"?] > >>>>> > >And what about Anders Sandberg? Or Max More and Natasha Vita-More? Point well taken. Damien has a habit of not acknowledging some works. :-- But in all honesty, none of us has written a book -- yet. Well, actually that is NOT true. I wrote a short self-published book which ought to be mentioned. But since it is self-published it is most likely looked down upon, unfortunately. I had offers to publish it, but as an Artist, I wanted it to be self-published at that time. I'm sure Anders and Max's dissections might be considered to be books of sorts. I'll suggest my book to be added to this list. Natasha Natasha Vita-More, BFA, MS, MPhil University Lecturer PhD Candidate, Planetary Collegium - University of Plymouth - Faculty of Technology School of Computing, Communications and Electronics Centre for Advanced Inquiry in the Interactive Arts 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 kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 18:13:28 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:13:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803161313.28779.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 16 March 2008, John Grigg wrote: > And what about Anders Sandberg? ?Or Max More and Natasha Vita-More? http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Transbibliography Go forth and dump (references). Heh. Why don't we have an 'extropian' wiki for content dumping yet? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 18:14:13 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:14:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] "Time does not exist." Message-ID: <8CA55A8ACAA704D-D74-44E4@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> A physicist, Julian Barbour, wrote a book about time which in reality only exist in the mind but since the mind/brain is a form of energy, is this thought of time a universal truth that exists locally? Is this a case of the relative meeting the absolute/compatibilism? We don't see thoughts but we see the effects of thoughts/the behavior of the mind just as we don't see gravity but only the effects of gravity. Sorry, we do not see time for we are time itself and who can tell who owns time? Who owns thoughts? Terry From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 16 18:28:49 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:28:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha -39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316132005.024883f8@satx.rr.com> At 12:40 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Natasha wrote: >>And what about Anders Sandberg? Or Max More and Natasha Vita-More? > >Point well taken. Damien has a habit of not acknowledging some works. What? The point I was (very hastily) making was precisely that many works had been overlooked. I was not submitting an exhaustive correction. I agree that Anders' copious web material on transhumanism should certainly be referenced, although arguably it has been a little less influential than Eliezer's, and there are many others who've contributed their thinking, their list discussions, their papers at seminars, their work behind the scenes. Not so many with published books, it's true, which was the key emphasis of the list Stefano provided. Damien Broderick From pjmanney at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 18:39:33 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:39:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Artscience' by David Edwards Message-ID: <29666bf30803161139v696a9166p3cb2c28d27fbfd5e@mail.gmail.com> Interesting foray into the growing awareness about the intersection of art and science. However, the review seems to indicate he may not have taken his argument far enough. PJ http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-et-book15mar15,1,4731331.story >From the Los Angeles Times BOOK REVIEW 'Artscience' by David Edwards Blurring the boundaries of science and art By David L. Ulin Los Angeles Times Staff Writer March 15, 2008 Several years ago, in a collection of her fiction, nonfiction and poetry, Lynne Sharon Schwartz made a vivid argument against specialization in the arts. "I had never planned to be a novelist in the first place," she declared. "I had planned, from the age of seven, to be a writer. A writer writes anything and everything, just as a composer composes anything -- not only sonatas or only nocturnes or only symphonies." She's right, of course, for specialization offers a progressive narrowing of vision, rather than the expansion upon which discovery depends. And yet, we live in a culture that prizes specialization, that distrusts serendipity or the blurring of boundaries, that tells us it is better to be an expert than a generalist. Such a notion -- or, more accurately, its refutation -- resides at the center of David Edwards' "Artscience: Creativity in the Post- Google Generation," a book that seeks to bridge perhaps the widest of the specialization gaps, the one separating science and art. "Among the sources of administrative inertia that weigh heavily on our educational and culture institutions," Edwards writes, "is the famous divide between art and science cultures. . . . That chasm still cuts through our cultural institutions and universities." For Edwards, this is not an intellectual conceit. A professor of biomedical engineering at Harvard University, he also is the founder of Le Laboratoire, an art and science center in Paris, and he's passionate that these areas of inquiry can overlap. The key is to rethink the traditional roles of art and science, to find a middle ground where we might frame aesthetic solutions to scientific questions, or apply a scientific rigor to the challenges of art. "[T]he fused method that results," he argues, "at once aesthetic and scientific -- intuitive and deductive, sensual and analytical, comfortable with uncertainty and able to frame a problem, embracing nature in its complexity and able to simplify to nature in its essence -- is what I call artscience." Edwards is hardly the first observer to identify a confluence between art and science. The most interesting science always relies on leaps of the imagination: "[W]here gaps exist among the facts of geology," John McPhee noted in his 1981 book "Basin and Range," "the space between is often filled with things 'geopoetical.' " The same is increasingly true of art, which in the digital age has become fluid, technological in content and form. "Today," Edwards reminds us, "we encounter in theaters, museums, cinemas, opera houses, city streets, our own living rooms, and just about anywhere we can imagine, artists of dizzying varieties integrating into their work the science and technology that change cultural expression as fast as it is changing lives." Here, we have the idea behind the book's subtitle, "Creativity in the Post-Google Generation." Yet as "Artscience" progresses, that turns out to be a misnomer, for Edwards is less interested in art or science than in -- irony of ironies -- a highly specialized sub-category in which scientists who are also artists apply both methodologies to their work. This, it turns out, is the fundamental flaw of "Artscience" -- not the concept but the book. In the name of raising broad philosophical questions, Edwards focuses on a small group of individuals, many of whom are his colleagues, which is troublesome in itself. More problematic is his insistence on framing these people as universal symbols of the process, when in fact they work almost entirely in rarefied realms. There's Peter Rose, a Canadian architect now at Harvard, who pioneered a kinetic design style based on the intersection of "space, form, and light." Or Don Ingber, who adapted Buckminster Fuller's notion of "tensegrity" (in which a form retains, rather than loses, its structural integrity when compressed) to the study of cancer, developing a new model of cellular mechanics, a "cellular tensegrity." These are fascinating people, and their work is profound and often beautiful. Still, Edwards never makes the case for them as pioneers whose efforts illustrate a wider set of connections, the latticework of interdisciplinary nuance upon which, or so he tells us, artscience depends. Part of the problem may be Edwards' narrowness of vision, his tendency to accept ideas that seem questionable to say the least. "A product sells. . . . [But the] recognition of a sale, and the media coverage that attends that sale, is frequently not enough," he suggests, describing the frustrations of economic success, as opposed to aesthetic success. "Creators, whoever and wherever they are, wish to be understood not for what they sell but for what they value." The implication is that the concerns of creativity and of the marketplace are inherently similar, but is that really true? Then, there's his faith in academia as a center of culture: "The research university," he avows, "may be the most powerful current engine for social engagement through artscience." Maybe so, but with its encoded bureaucratic structures, its dependence on peer review and tenure, the university more often has been an engine of stasis, of the status quo. Edwards admits as much, acknowledging that "over the last half century the business of science, perhaps of academia in general, had created a standardized format that misled you, misled you as a scientist and as a non-scientist, and you never stopped to question what science really was, or what it could be, because it seemed too thoroughly agreed on." But this suggests a number of questions that Edwards does not raise. How many groundbreaking cultural ideas have come from universities? And how many from independent artists and thinkers, operating in some unbound territory of their own? In the arts, the most profound academic movement of the last 30 years has been the rise of theory, which is the creative equivalent of an autopsy, less about culture than about the dissection of culture -- and as such, a kind of cultural death. Unfortunately, that's precisely where "Artscience" leaves us, with a theory that never quite comes to life. Edwards is a smart, dedicated thinker, and he's definitely tapped into something; art and science are coming closer, and technology has transformed not just our aesthetics but the very ways in which we create. It's a big idea, and Edwards deserves credit for having seen it, for recognizing that specialization represents its own slow death. But in the end, the territory is too big for him to master, and his argument too small to measure up. david.ulin at latimes.com David L. Ulin is The Times' book editor. Artscience Creativity in the Post-Google Generation David Edwards Harvard University Press: 196 pp., $19.95 From msd001 at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 18:41:31 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:41:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Gary Miller wrote: > If I am in an airport and someone next to me had something that looks like a > bomb strapped to the chest I would hope the police take the head shot and > find out if the bomb was real afterward before the person has a chance to > detonate it. ... if she drowns then she was not a witch, but if she doesn't drown then you should burn her for being a witch. You better be careful with that pack of Rolaids after terrorist start using bombs that look like a pack of Rolaids. You know, because we'll sort out your heartburn issues after the police "take the head shot." At least the rest of us will be safe. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 18:43:53 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:43:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Time does not exist." In-Reply-To: <8CA55A8ACAA704D-D74-44E4@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA55A8ACAA704D-D74-44E4@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803161143u46d019e1n315a23352193b5b6@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: Sorry, we do not see time for we are time itself and who can tell who owns time? Who owns thoughts? >>> GOD!!! It's God!!! "Dead? No excuse for laying off work!" "Oh, I do hate appearing that way, it's an entirely noisy manifestation. Still, rather expected of one, I suppose." "They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution." "Do be careful! Don't lose any of that stuff. That's concentrated evil. One drop of that could turn you all into hermit crabs." "Who's are these?" John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 16 18:50:06 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:50:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ writes > Lee wrote: > >> I [should] remind everyone that developing a genetic explanation >> always requires a [discussion of] selective advantage, and since >> we seem to have here an equilibrium, it's that which needs to be >> explained too. E.g., what if there are too many early risers, how >> does that increase the number of viable offspring of the late risers >> and vice-versa? > > What about simply, the early birds take the early shift and the night > owls take the late shift? Between the two, you cover a larger set of > hours, get more accomplished and have someone on deck either > protecting the tribe or getting stuff done. Yes, there are advantage to that "morning, swing, and late" shift kind of strategy. A wise tribal leader might suggest it, or a king might impose it. (Right now, our market economy evolves it :-) but people are at least free to try to find what suits them.) No, the problem I'm talking about is the perpetual struggle to keep *group selection* at bay. Just because some behavior would benefit the group as a whole hardly means that it will be individually selected for. (Sorry if this is old hat to you, but, as often, I feel a little responsibility to the vast unseen audience :-) Suppose that in a given tribe there really are genetic differences between the early risers and late risers. (I don't know if this is the case---I didn't follow all the URLs, and no one here so far has given me a Y or a N.) Then the population biologist has to ask, "How can that be? Why didn't whichever one that had even the slightest selective advantage come to predominate? Why, for example, didn't the early risers take charge and create the best opportunities for themselves and leave less for the late ones?" But we (I take it) seem to have an equilibrium: that is, there may be about the same number of each. The best example of this is sex! Why is the ratio approximately 50/50, with only minor variations easily explained (or conjectured) by the evolutionary psychologists? In a number of heavy duty but quite readable books (e.g. "The Red Queen" by Matt Ridley), the logic is spelled out. Also, Dawkins explains clearly in his books and essays. The basic idea goes like this: Suppose that there is a mutation and some woman begins having only daughters, and this mutation is passed on to all her (female, of course) offspring. Then pretty soon, each *man* is getting a lot more offspring than before, because each has correspondingly more women to lay. Then, you see, women who still have *sons* start having, ultimately, more offspring than their competitors who have only daughters. (To take the simplest case, suppose that a tribe had one woman who had sons & daughters equally, or sons exclusively, and all the other women had all daughters. Then clearly the woman making sons gets her genes into subsequent generations at a far faster rate than any other particular women.) So an equilibrium exists. Sorry, I've probably not done such a hot job explaining this, but probably wikipedia or somewhere can do much better. So it's the same with the early risers vs. late risers. We'd need a mechanism for why there is any kind of balance. Lee From santostasigio at yahoo.com Sun Mar 16 18:25:18 2008 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santost) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany Find Use Of 'Doktor' Verboten In-Reply-To: <580930c20803160743j5ed9ef34j99f4745b9e54f832@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <779131.15748.qm@web31308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, I don't think completing the short degrees allows you to be call a Doctor. It is also important to mention that the old italian laurea fell slightly short of a PhD in terms of time and stardard required to obtain it. An the Italianian students will face what are master level classes from the first years of university, just focusing on his major. The term doctor, even if used in a jokingly way with people that not necessarily are doctors, it is actually much more respected in Italy than in America. To be a doctor is a real honor. As it is to be a engeneer, notary, attorney. We call professors even our high school teachers (that have to have a Laurea to teach) as a sign of respect. At least all this was true when I was in Italy almost 15 years ago. Stefano Vaj wrote: On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > At the other end of the spectrum is Italy, where one can be called a > 'Dr.' after a Laurea degree [2], there is even a shorter Laurea begun in > Berlusconi's last period, so one could legally (in Italy) be called a > Dr. after just a few years of university. And if you meet an Italian > older than their later 50s with a PhD after their name, then they did > not earn their PhD in Italy, since the PhD didn't exist (the PhD was > offered in Italy starting in the middle 80s). Yes. I am not sure about the new short courses, but all and every old university degree were "doctorates" in Italian, in the very spirit of the Spanish king who rather than abolishing nobility at a point in time declared "todos caballeros", meaning that every citizen had been automatically knighted. :-) In fact, it is quite funny that when asking for an espresso in bar, one gets often the reply "there it is, doctor" even though the waiter hasn't the foggiest idea of what kind of education (primary school?) his patron may have completed. There is something however where Italy and the US are similar, namely the fact that owing to the fact that American law schools, being postgraduate, started in the XX century to call their degree JD (juris doctor, or doctor in law), in both countries paradoxically a law student become a Doctor first and a Master (more specifically, LLM., legum magister, master of law) later on, while this would not make any sense in France, Germany or the UK, where the progression is bacherlor/licensee, master, doctor in all fields. Lastly, to be called doctor is a very umpleasant experience for an Italian lawyer, since it reminds you of your period of statutory training when you had not passed the bar yet, and thus people could not call you "attorney"... :-) All in all, I think I would gladly reserve the title of Dr. as a courtesy prefix to MDs... Stefano Vaj _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 16 19:07:06 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:07:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Time does not exist." References: <8CA55A8ACAA704D-D74-44E4@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <183201c88799$61ad9110$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes > A physicist, Julian Barbour, wrote a book about time ["The End of > Time"] which in reality only exists in the mind but since the mind/brain > is a form of energy, is this thought of time a universal truth that exists > locally? I can't agree that his claim ought to be described like that. It's not the case that he's saying that "reality only exists in the mind". He's just following the ancient scientific practice of trying to explain one phenomenon by a reductionistic appeal to phenomena at a lower level. In this case, *time* is the target, and he attempts to show that we ought to regard it simply as an (almost) unordered configuration of states of matter (and energy). For example, the time that we see as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,... might really in timeless Platonia be 67 23 123 34 12345 12 456 345 ... in no particular order. (Invitations to anyone to improve my analogy.) Have you read the reviews at Amazon, for example of Barbour's book? Some will probably do a fine job of explaining what he's about. > Is this a case of the relative meeting the absolute/compatibilism? I wouldn't touch that question with a ten foot Czech. :-) > We don't see thoughts but we see the effects of thoughts/the behavior > of the mind just as we don't see gravity but only the effects of gravity. I agree. But they're making progrss with the MRI equipment as regards thoughts, and some kinds of astronomical paraphernalia sort of image gravity, at least gravity among the galaxies. > Sorry, we do not see time, for we are time itself and who can tell who > owns time? Who owns thoughts? So far as I have been able to determine, the property laws of no existing country on Earth establishes any conditions for the ownership by any entity of *time*. Now, of course, God (if He deigns to exist) probably does, since He made and so it rightfully belongs to Him. Besides, He's got the most battalions :-) As for who owns thoughts, that's under hot dispute in the U.S. The damned patent office seems to have embarked upon a lot of unholy rulings and precendents, not to say destructive practices. But I don't really know much about it. In some ideal cases, who ever originates a thought should own it. But that probably doesn't really make sense except under certain conditions, and probably isn't helpful towards the advance of civilization. Lee From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 19:13:49 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:13:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Eradicating aging and mortality? Message-ID: <8CA55B0FFB2942D-D74-46A2@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> "Editore: The Immortalist Institute by Libros en Red Sito dedicato all'opera Link per l'acquisto Descrizione Nineteen scientists, doctors and philosophers share their perspective on what is arguably the most significant scientific development that humanity has ever faced - the eradication of aging and mortality. This anthology is both a gentle introduction to the multitude of cutting-edge scientific developments, and a thoughtful, multidisciplinary discussion of the ethics, politics and philosophy behind the scientific conquest of aging. ___________ The above anthology is rated "H" or whatever. The philosophical view of aging and mortality leans more to what the editor called a gentle introduction to cutting -edge scientific developments sounding like a profound thought about ethics and politics rather than a philosophy of science. I maybe mistaken to think what those nineteen scientists, doctors and philosophers have concluded since I was not present during their discussion. However, the scientific method of investigation has nothing to do with ethics or politics. Using ethics or politics to discover the laws of nature is incompatible with objectivity. Nature is neither ethical nor political. Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 19:42:59 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:42:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] SF novel co-authored by a Roman Catholic Priest Message-ID: <2d6187670803161242r76b5ae3cx7f82e79399df7b20@mail.gmail.com> Well, Andrew Greely has written fantasy so why not have a Roman Catholic priest writing science fiction? John Taken from the SciFi.com website: Determined to recapture the science fiction of their youth, not as it was but as it should have been, Gary K. Wolf, creator of Roger Rabbit, and his best friend, John J. Myers, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Newark, N.J., now transport us to the far reaches of the galaxy. There the mere mention of the pirate known as Space Vulture strikes fear into every heart, and a hardworking colonist's only hope is that the dauntless lawman Marshal Victor Corsaire will rocket to the rescue. Come along for the ride and discover all the adventure, suspense, wonder and fun that Gary and John first found in science fiction 50 years ago and now share with you in this rollicking tale of the spaceways. *Gary K. Wolf* wrote three science-fiction novels for Doubleday and twice had short stories in the distinguished *Orbit* anthology before introducing Roger Rabbit in *Who Censored Roger Rabbit?* (St. Martin's, 1981), the basis for the hit film, *Who Framed Roger Rabbit* (1988). Before becoming a full-time writer, Wolf spent 17 years working in advertising. The Most Reverend *John J. Myers* was the Bishop of Peoria, Ill., before being installed as Archbishop of Newark, N.J., in 2001. He holds a doctorate in canon law and his written in that field as well as on theological and pastoral matters. >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 20:27:07 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:27:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <580930c20803161327g500d6436g5a0c14f478220e94@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > I'll suggest my book to be added to this list. > Done, with the maximum recommendation score... :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 20:34:09 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:34:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universal Transhumanist Bibliography In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316132005.024883f8@satx.rr.com> References: <580930c20803160801x4cc76214q6134c701f8fe069c@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316111429.02388008@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803160946u371aef78l75bccb53a09fae8f@mail.gmail.com> <20080316174101.ERXY18091.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316132005.024883f8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803161334k13b438e1l5392baf9e3ac0c2b@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > What? The point I was (very hastily) making was precisely that many > works had been overlooked. I was not submitting an exhaustive > correction. > Actually, my impression is that we have probably covered by now some seventy per cent of currently available books in English, eighty per cent in Italian, something more like fifty in French and German, even less in Spanish, let alone Portuguese, Japanese, Finnish and more exotic languages. Some of them may be very important to many of us, other may deserve anyway to be mentioned. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 16 20:40:47 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:40:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser><001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Olga said: << Vile anti-American hatred? I take it you haven't been in a "black" inner-city church service lately or are not familiar with them in the least? Inflammatory thetoric in those kind of churches is prevalent, part of the show. However, while they may exagerrate for effect sometimes, the rhetoric isn't always wrong. Martin Luther King preached this in a sermon (about the Vietnam war) in 1967" : "Don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as His divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America: 'You are too arrogant! If you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power." Cf. to what Jeremiah Wright said (2003 sermon): "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme." Jeremiah Wright said (2001 sermon): "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards ..." >> I think you are doing the memory of Martin Luther King a grave disservice comparing him to the likes of Jerimiah Wright. Dr. King is remembered for his doctrine of hope and uniting all people regardless of race. And no I have never attended a black Church but I have in my past attended churches which were attended by all races and never heard speech designed to be inflammatory, divisive and pit the races against one another. These are the kind of sermons that I imagine were given at Klan rallies though. If you are saying that all black churches teach this brand of religion where America, Jews, and other races are blamed for all the problems in the world then I am even further aghast. While middle class America is attempting to put it's racist attitudes behind it sounds as if ministers like Jeremiah Wright are set on creating anger, resentment and placing blame. By instilling that kind of resentment and anger in children he is doing far worse than just filling his collection plates. I classify Jerimiah Wright with the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan who profit from the exploiting the economic, and social disparity between the races for their own profit. Jeremiah Wright is fond of the expression bringing chickens back home to roost. How ironic it would be if his rhetoric and hate speech brings his chickens back home to roost and costs his chosen son Obama the election! Wright has also been quoted as saying "The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people." He has also told is congregation "The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied." One wonders if he believes that the white man created sickle cell anemia also. From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 20:58:47 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:58:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Eradicating aging and mortality? In-Reply-To: <8CA55B0FFB2942D-D74-46A2@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA55B0FFB2942D-D74-46A2@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803161358k2b19d2e5pb5eaabfe2090e4a0@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:13 PM, wrote: > > "Editore: The Immortalist Institute by Libros en Red > Sito dedicato all'opera > Link per l'acquisto > Descrizione > Nineteen scientists, doctors and philosophers share their perspective > on what is arguably the most significant scientific development that > humanity has ever faced - the eradication of aging and mortality. This > anthology is both a gentle introduction to the multitude of > cutting-edge scientific developments, and a thoughtful, > multidisciplinary discussion of the ethics, politics and philosophy > behind the scientific conquest of aging. > ___________ > > The above anthology is rated "H" or whatever. The philosophical view of > aging and mortality leans more to what the editor called a gentle > introduction to cutting -edge scientific developments sounding like a > profound thought about ethics and politics rather than a philosophy of > science. I maybe mistaken to think what those nineteen scientists, > doctors and philosophers have concluded since I was not present during > their discussion. > > However, the scientific method of investigation has nothing to do with > ethics or politics. Using ethics or politics to discover the laws of > nature is incompatible with objectivity. Nature is neither ethical nor > political. > I am not exactly sure of what is your point. The book description is that of the publisher or reseller, the comments (if any) are our own. As to the "H+" rating, longevism is usually considered as a subject of direct relevance to transhumanism, hence the rating. Please note, btw, that inclusion does not imply any kind of endorsement of a given book's content or ideas. In fact, we have included many works of rabid anti-transhumanists or authors promoting rather idiosincratic or peculiar views of the posthuman change. Even the "stars" are given on the basis of our views on relevance, not on the merits. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 16 21:02:17 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:02:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Australian state public health system update Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> The Age newspaper of Melbourne reports: Surgeons walk out of public system Nick Miller March 17, 2008 SURGEONS are quitting Victoria's public health system in alarming numbers, dismayed at their working conditions and pay, a ministerial review says. Morale is low, frustration is rising and senior and junior surgeons are joining the exodus, the independent review says. The Australian Medical Association says this is evidence that Victoria is on the precipice of a crisis in public health. "Public hospitals are at a crossroads: what happens now will determine whether we plunge into crisis or not," AMA Victoria president Doug Travis said. "Fewer surgeons will mean fewer operations. It's that simple." From 2000 to 2006, the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) surgeons operating only in the public sector dropped by almost 40%, from 139 to 84. At the same time, the number of FTE surgeons operating publicly and privately fell by almost 10%, from 914 to 826. FTE numbers in the private sector stayed steady. FTEs do not directly correspond to surgeon numbers, but show that surgeons are doing less work in public hospitals. Tim Woodruff, of the Doctors Reform Society of Australia, said this was a worrying trend that would hurt those with serious, complicated illnesses who could not afford private health cover. The Ministerial Review of Victorian Public Health Medical Staff was completed in November but has not been released by the Government. The Age has seen the part of the review that looks at problems with retaining senior staff in the public system. It says the problem is not confined to surgeons. "Both general working conditions and remuneration are driving Victorian doctors from the public sector both into the private sector and interstate," the review says. "Reasons that attracted clinicians to public hospitals in the past are rapidly disappearing." Procedural specialists are a particularly endangered species, the review was told. "There is considerable disquiet particularly amongst orthopedic surgeons within the public health sector, with many surgeons having resigned their public appointments within the past 12 months," the review panel heard. "These resignations not only include many senior surgeons but also a number of junior surgeons." Low pay in the public sector is a key determinant in the problem, the review says. But surgeons in the public systems are also affected by a loss of goodwill and job satisfaction. "There were many reports of poor morale, a feeling that medical practitioners were devalued by the system and by management," the review says. Medical practitioners told the review panel there was a proliferation of hospital bureaucracy, setting key performance indicators that did not relate to quality of care but increasingly emphasised patient throughput. One submission says staff morale at Victorian hospitals is at an all-time low. "Attendance at medical staff meetings, once dynamic, frequently fails to make a quorum," it says. Another complained about the increasing separation of hospital management from medical, nursing and paramedical staff. "This has led to such a high degree of frustration that many who were previously committed to the public hospital system have often decided to spend the minimum time possible (if any) in the public health system." Dr Travis said the report's findings matched his own observations. Younger surgeons were more likely to go interstate, where they could earn up to $100,000 more a year, he said. Older surgeons were more likely to cut the amount of work in public hospitals. "We are on the precipice," he said. He called for the immediate release of the report so work could start on addressing its recommendations. Last week Nationals leader Peter Ryan quoted in Parliament a leaked section of the report's findings that said reduction in bed numbers and high occupancy rates were causing stress in the health system. "It puts the lie to the position the Government consistently portrays: that the system is running well," he said. Health Minister Daniel Andrews told Parliament the review was entering its final stages. "There will be a Government response," he said. Yesterday a spokeswoman for Mr Andrews said the report would be released shortly. "The Brumby Government has recruited an additional 1800 doctors to the system since coming to government," she said. "We currently invest around $40 million each year to recruit and retain our health workforce. "We are working with the Rudd Government to address this issue." From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 16 21:11:45 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:11:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Mike said in response to my earlier post: << On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Gary Miller wrote: > If I am in an airport and someone next to me had something that looks > like a bomb strapped to the chest I would hope the police take the > head shot and find out if the bomb was real afterward before the > person has a chance to detonate it. ... if she drowns then she was not a witch, but if she doesn't drown then you should burn her for being a witch. You better be careful with that pack of Rolaids after terrorist start using bombs that look like a pack of Rolaids. You know, because we'll sort out your heartburn issues after the police "take the head shot." At least the rest of us will be safe. >> Come on Mike terrorists and bombs exist, witches don't. People are shot all the time because the police can't be expected to distinguish between a toy gun and a real one. If I was to walk through an airport carrying a toy gun in my hand I'd be tackled or shot before I ever made it to the gate and rightfully so. And I'd like to think that if and when the airlines bans Rolaids as a potentially dangerous item I will be intelligent enough to leave them at home. And if I try to smuggle them on the flight anyway just to get my name in the paper or make a point then go ahead and "take that head shot". I'd deserve it just for being so stupid. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 16 21:28:44 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:28:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com> <008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <2d6187670803161428v73303e63i7d9197db85d693d@mail.gmail.com> Gary Miller wrote: Come on Mike terrorists and bombs exist, witches don't. >>> They don't? http://www.morticiasmorgue.com/witch1.html Whether or not they have "magical" powers, they certainly do exist. And if the foundation of Western Witchcraft had come from Islamic culture then we probably would see them being very closely monitored by various national governments. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 21:33:34 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:33:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Spacetime exists as a thought Message-ID: <8CA55C485D39CE4-E28-11F7@webmail-nc21.sysops.aol.com> "> A physicist, Julian Barbour, wrote a book about time ["The End of > Time"] which in reality only exists in the mind but since the mind/brain > is a form of energy, is this thought of time a universal truth that exists > locally? Lee: "I can't agree that his claim ought to be described like that. It's not the case that he's saying that "reality only exists in the mind". He's just following the ancient scientific practice of trying to explain one phenomenon by a reductionistic appeal to phenomena at a lower level. In this case, *time* is the target, and he attempts to show that we ought to regard it simply as an (almost) unordered configuration of states of matter (and energy)." _____________ The late Carl Sagan claimed we lived in a four dimentional universe including time. Time is just a movement of the mind. If there's no movement, no time, no thoughts and no consciousness either, we are brain dead so to speak. This state cannot be reversed as stated in some laws of thermodynamics. If we could make the dead come back to life, that would be a miracle indeed. I'm not talking about some temporary comatose state for the degree of consciousness vary moment to moment depending on the extent and location of brain injuries. What we call a reductionist view is still a function of the mind, the behavior of a living organ system/brain. Terry From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Mar 16 21:27:56 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:27:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser><001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 1:40 PM > > I think you are doing the memory of Martin Luther King a grave disservice > comparing him to the likes of Jerimiah Wright. ... Dr. King is remembered > for his doctrine of hope and uniting all people regardless of race. King was considered to be very radical for his ideas when he first came on the scene (and was under FBI surveillance for most of his civil rights career). His strength was that he was good at uniting coalitions of people for the cause. > And no I have never attended a black Church but I have in my past attended > churches which were attended by all races and never heard speech designed > to > be inflammatory, divisive and pit the races against one another. These > are > the kind of sermons that I imagine were given at Klan rallies though. If > you are saying that all black churches teach this brand of religion where > America, Jews, and other races are blamed for all the problems in the > world > then I am even further aghast. I never said all black churches preach this way - many inner city ones have and do (but, certainly, not all the time ... from what I've read someone had to dig deep to find those few remarks of Wright's. Comparing inner city black church rhetoric with Klan rallies is wrong and not helpful in this context. > While middle class America is attempting to put its racist attitudes > behind > it sounds as if ministers like Jeremiah Wright are set on creating anger, > resentment and placing blame. By instilling that kind of resentment and > anger in children he is doing far worse than just filling his collection > plates. I am not familiar with Wright's racist attitudes. From what I read his diatribes were directed at some policies in America (I may be wrong about this ... I haven't dug deep enough to see that Wright's quotes were directed at white people). > I classify Jerimiah Wright with the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton > and > Louis Farrakhan who profit from the exploiting the economic, and social > disparity between the races for their own profit. Unfortunately, profiting by exploiting people is what churches do. I personally hate to pay taxes to the special exemptions religions institutions get (although - I know it's heresy to say this on this list - I don't mind paying some other taxes). You can add Falwell, Santorum, Billy Graham, Swaggart, and hundreds of other preachers to your list (why single out the ones who happen to be black?). > Jeremiah Wright is fond of the expression bringing chickens back home to > roost. How ironic it would be if his rhetoric and hate speech brings his > chickens back home to roost and costs his chosen son Obama the election! I certainly hope Americans are smarter than chickens. > Wright has also been quoted as saying "The government gives them the > drugs, > builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing > 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for > killing innocent people." Isn't free speech wonderful? I never ever stand up for the anthem, and I never ever do the pledge of allegiance myself. Does this make me a traitor? I love it that America can tolerate diverse opinions. Do you think America should not be criticized? > He has also told is congregation "The government lied about inventing the > HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government > lied." The answer to a bad idea is a better idea. > One wonders if he believes that the white man created sickle cell anemia > also. Oh, right, bring it on - the kitchen sink of white privilege. You "wonder." I never said I have any particular respect for Wright. I have no respect for Hillary Clinton either. Or Bill Clinton. Or McCain. And don't even mention George Bush in my presence, please ... I'm tolerant, but only to a degree. ;) Olga From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 16 22:32:48 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:32:48 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: Gary Miller: >I went to your links and read the articles on each site Amara to find out >what I have been missing. And since I had already read those articles >elsewhere or similar versions of those articles and found no significant >details which were missing from the versions I read I am satisfied that the >news sources I read regularly are varied enough and are not filtered such >that I am not receiving a propagandist view. Then you didn't read enough because those two web sites are full of data about the 'anti-terrorist' actions of the Feds that went awry (most of the cases are like that) or where they applied the hastily-passed Congressional bills for other purposes than what is was intended, or (more) of your 200 year old constitutional rights destroyed. Maybe you missed that there are human beings labelled as 'enemy combatants' (government-speak for terrorists), who have been locked away arbitrarily for years at Guantanamo Bay, no contact with lawyers or their families, poor treatment, so one shouldn't be surprised that there have been hundreds of suicide attempts and at least 4 successful ones. Maybe you missed that the Feds started a war on a pretext, invading another country, with almost 90,000 civilians dead (iraqbodycount.org), and with no end in sight using 'terrorism' as one of their fear-amplification tools to continue the process. As of 2008, the Feds can pick you up and take you away for no more than you sneezing out of your left nostril, and you don't have to be an American citizen or on US soil for that to happen. In fact your skin doesn't even need to be dark or you speaking Arabic or have a cousin in Egypt for that to happen, although that helps, since the US government continues to use Profiling as a means to identify who they should consider as terrorists or not. Even though it has been rigorously demonstrated that Profiling _does not work_. So in addition to the EFF and Declan's sites as good sources of information, I suggest to add Bruce Schneier's web site to your list of information resources as well: http://www.schneier.com/index.html Here's one of his articles about Profiling: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/07/profiling.html And more articles about the Federal Security Theatre http://www.schneier.com/essays.html The money the Feds (and all of the other governments who have followed) spend on their theatre is well-spent, right? Hopefully you can sleep at night that those persons who are dark skinned and who like Persian poetry are locked away, keeping _you_ safe, since that illusion of safety and people's fear is what allows the process to continue. Until that is, we are all locked away except for the jailors with the keys. And please as I'm sure that the US Federal government would like, have a very nice and fear-filled day, Amara From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 22:42:27 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:42:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Rhetoric is Prozelityzing Message-ID: <8CA55CE24E4DB64-E28-13F1@webmail-nc21.sysops.aol.com> Olga: " And I am extremely uncomfortable with a candidate whose church spews such vile Anti-American hatred as Obama's does and then he expects us to believe that he did not know such sermons were being given. This man was his personal friend if these are the things he is telling his congregation in public what is he telling his friend, possibly the future president in private? That's just scary as fuck, I'm sorry!" _________ Some rhetoric is a propaganda like prozelytizing by religious adherents. They don't scare me but made me angry. Olga: "Vile anti-American hatred? I take it you haven't been in a "black" inner-city church service lately or are not familiar with them in the least? Inflammatory thetoric in those kind of churches is prevalent, part of the show. However, while they may exagerrate for effect sometimes, the rhetoric isn't always wrong." _____________ My anger turned into pity for those members of their congregation as well as to the ministers whose intent is obviously to influence the minds to believe what they believe that peace can be realized by singing and dancing in church. Such loud rhetoric is a cry for attention or a need to be relieved of suffering. They cannot understand that their ignorance is the cause of their suffering. Olga:."Martin Luther King preached this in a sermon (about the Vietnam war) in 1967" : "Don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as His divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America: 'You are too arrogant! If you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power." Cf. to what Jeremiah Wright said (2003 sermon): "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme." Jeremiah Wright said (2001 sermon): "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards ..." ____________ The above sermon sound like a rhetoric to appeal to our emotions. If we use reason instead of emotion, we should be able to do critical analysis of the situation by paying attention to details. Terry From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 16 22:29:52 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:29:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <200803162256.m2GMuXeD017302@andromeda.ziaspace.com> ... > Gary Miller ... > Subject: Re: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? > > ... > But our government has reminded us numerous times that is > just a small percentage of fanatical Muslims who believe in > Jihad against other religions and that we must not direct our > rage against all believer in Islam or people from countries > where fundamentalists are the most vocal. Gary Gary I am disappointed in the vast majority of peaceful believers who do little or nothing to help catch the violent small percentage within their ranks. Seldom do members of the vast majority infiltrate the small fananical groups and help bring them down, even though they would be ideally situated to discover the dangerous ones. I am disappointed in how few thunderous Friday sermons are delivered on how everyone must live in peace with those of other faiths, and the duty to crush those who believe and teach to the contrary. spike From amara at amara.com Sun Mar 16 22:56:38 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:56:38 -0600 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Artscience' by David Edwards Message-ID: Dear PJ, along the line of your post, here is something I wrote five weeks ago to the Boulder Future Salons' list, that might be interesting for those who like this subject. Someone on the Boulder Future Salon said: [...] >Leonard Shlain's books talk about how historically, artists proceeded >science in the progressive development of new ideas. I guess his thesis is that the arts provide the imaginative spark and creativity..? But I would say that each side (science and art) needs the other for a full spawning of a new idea. Look at Leonardo da Vinci's work for examples of that. There is a fair amount literature that blends today's common definition of 'art' and science, for example: - Barrow's _The Artful Universe_ - the bazillion books about fractal mathematics (see here: http://www.fractalartcontests.com/2007/winners.php for some recent renditions) - every issue of Seed magazine and from my art-science bookmarks: ------------------------------------ The single most important picture taken by humans: (Hubble Deep Field) http://deepastronomy.com/hubble-deep-field.html Milky Way City http://www.astrophoto.com/Mwaycity.htm Boing Boing Art Archives http://www.boingboing.net/art/ Naked Geometry http://www.nakedgeometry.com/store.html frameboX - Salad (you will never look at Alien the same say again) http://www.framebox.de/creations/3d/salad/ Mathematical Imagery http://www.josleys.com/index.php Rhizome Art http://rhizome.org/ ziofil's deviantART gallery http://ziofil.deviantart.com/gallery/ Discovering and Illustrating Patterns in Data http://www.neoformix.com/archive.html Edward Tufte Graphics Arts http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/ David Rumsey Map Collection http://www.davidrumsey.com/ Geostationary Banana Over Texas http://www.geostationarybananaovertexas.com/en.html Celestial Mechanics planetarium-based art http://www.cmlab.com/ Open Source Science Outreach (visualizations) http://astro.uchicago.edu/cosmus/index.html A visual exploration on mapping complex networks http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/index.cfm Spider Web Construction Gallery http://www.conservation.unibas.ch/team/zschokke/spidergallery.html Art of Physics http://www.cap.ca/cap/art.html Maps at Strangemaps http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/ BiblioOdyssey http://bibliodyssey.blogspot.com/ Pale Blue Dot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47EBLD-ISyc Theremin (Randy George performing Barkley's 'Crazy') http://laughingsquid.com/theremin-cover-version-of-gnarls-barkleys-crazy/ Ruben's Tube Music http://wohba.com/pages/ruben1006.html Guinness Evolution Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L4MOHpOLWo Will Wright's Spore Video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8372603330420559198 I don't view art and science as separate fields of endeavor.... and .. if one adopts Aristotle's definition of 'Art', which is a creation, an alchemy, the Greeks did not view them separately either. Aristotle's two possibilities of art (_Physics II_) are to 1) perfect natural processes and to bring them to a state of completion not found in nature itself (i.e. improve), and to 2) only imitate nature without fundamentally altering it, i.e., to imitate various aspects of the natural world. In the ancient world, this imitation was considered a little like cheating, counterfeit. And that opens up ideas that humans have debated for thousands of years: Was 'art' always limited to the imperfect mimicry of nature or could human beings genuinely recreate natural products? Did the assertions of the alchemists infringe on the power of 'God' himself, turning man into the creator on the same level as the divinity? If alchemists could make precious metals, where did their powers end? To the replication of life? Could they improved on the life that the 'creator' formed? These are very old questions, yet very much in debate in the politics, academics and philosophical arenas today. I wrote a summary piece on that aspect reviewing William Newman's book: _Promethean Ambitions_ here: "Of Transhumanists: Following the trail of the alchemists" http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2005-February/013649.html Ciao, Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 16 23:11:08 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:11:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Safer Now? Message-ID: <8CA55D227155612-E28-14F2@webmail-nc21.sysops.aol.com> "> ...but until then we will get what we deserve, a > crack pot old man from Arizona, a woman who wants to run a > country while she could not keep track of her husband > predilections, a guy from Chicago, who was absent 70% from > his job as a state senator... Spike: "In the 08 US presidential election, there are three choices left. Voters must choose to be either a sexist, a racist or a republicanist." ________ So you'd vote with your emotions rather than with reason? Those who would vote for Obama as the polls said are 98 % blacks. There maybe some truths in that, perhaps 50% true. Obama is part white[mother's side} and part black{ father's side}. I don't believe in polls but I tend to believe that the above perspective clings to his biases {not Spike}. If I use reason I think that Obama lacks experience in foreign policy. Why is he absent 70% from his job as a state senator? He claimed he was busy doing community work in Chicago. If so then he should stay in that work where he is best suited for. I don't know if he could get on the job training to stop the globalization of terrorism and a war more complex than the past. He might be too arrogant to run for vice president under Clinton because of his craving for change which is easily said than done. Terry From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Mar 16 22:52:36 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:52:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Rhetoric is Prozelityzing References: <8CA55CE24E4DB64-E28-13F1@webmail-nc21.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <001301c887b8$6e277130$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: To: Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 3:42 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Rhetoric is Prozelityzing > > Olga: " And I am extremely uncomfortable with a candidate whose church > spews > such vile Anti-American hatred as Obama's does and then he expects us > to > believe that he did not know such sermons were being given. This man > was > his personal friend if these are the things he is telling his > congregation > in public what is he telling his friend, possibly the future president > in > private? That's just scary as fuck, I'm sorry!" I did not write this. From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Mar 17 00:29:57 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:29:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Artscience' by David Edwards In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803161139v696a9166p3cb2c28d27fbfd5e@mail.gmail.co m> References: <29666bf30803161139v696a9166p3cb2c28d27fbfd5e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080317003000.FXAR7571.hrndva-omta05.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 01:39 PM 3/16/2008, PJ Manney wrote: >Interesting foray into the growing awareness about the intersection of >art and science. However, the review seems to indicate he may not >have taken his argument far enough. This historical topic has been known to express the subjectivity of perspectives (such as Edward's) rather than accuracy of practices where the arts and sciences coalesce. In my practice, and the practices of my arts friends, science is a crucial element, whether the sciences are hard or soft, and regardless of fields within the sciences and there simply is not gap. Specializations are not the enemy. I think Leonardo magazine http://www.leonardo.info/ has put arguments about Arts/Science being at odds to rest quite some time ago. For example, I am on the advisory board of a group working with these: http://www.ynba.org/2008/music.php http://www.pietronigro.com/zgac/ (snips) >In the arts, the most profound academic movement of the last 30 years >has been the rise of theory, which is the creative equivalent of an >autopsy, less about culture than about the dissection of culture -- >and as such, a kind of cultural death. I can't make sense of this. Sounds like postmodernist propaganda. >Unfortunately, that's precisely where "Artscience" leaves us, with a >theory that never quite comes to life. > >Edwards is a smart, dedicated thinker, and he's definitely tapped into >something; art and science are coming closer, and technology has >transformed not just our aesthetics but the very ways in which we >create. BS. They came closer eons ago. In fact, in most educated discourse it is a non-issue. Regardless, I see that there are problems, but the problems are disputed in rooms with closed windows. Thanks PJ for posting this, Natasha Natasha Vita-More, BFA, MS, MPhil University Lecturer PhD Candidate, Planetary Collegium - University of Plymouth - Faculty of Technology School of Computing, Communications and Electronics Centre for Advanced Inquiry in the Interactive Arts 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 att.net Mon Mar 17 00:37:26 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:37:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Olga Bourlin ... > > Cf. to what Jeremiah Wright said (2003 sermon): > > "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than > human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is > God and she is supreme." > > Jeremiah Wright said (2001 sermon): > > "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians > and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because > the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to > our own front yards ..." Olga Olga, I see Wright is in the headline news for the third day. Future historians may see the Wright material coming into the public awareness as the beginning of the end of Obama's presidential hopes. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 17 00:51:16 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:51:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Artscience' by David Edwards In-Reply-To: <20080317003000.FXAR7571.hrndva-omta05.mail.rr.com@natasha- 39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <29666bf30803161139v696a9166p3cb2c28d27fbfd5e@mail.gmail.com> <20080317003000.FXAR7571.hrndva-omta05.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316194619.02434910@satx.rr.com> At 07:29 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Natasha wrote: >>In the arts, the most profound academic movement of the last 30 years >>has been the rise of theory, which is the creative equivalent of an >>autopsy, less about culture than about the dissection of culture -- >>and as such, a kind of cultural death. > >I can't make sense of this. Sounds like postmodernist propaganda. This is a 180-degree misreading of David L. Ulin's statement. Like *anti*postmodernist propaganda, if anything. More strictly, I'd say, antipoststructuralism. Re-read his preceding paragraph: "How many groundbreaking cultural ideas have come from universities? And how many from independent artists and thinkers, operating in some unbound territory of their own?" Damien Broderick From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 17 00:52:12 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:52:12 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: John Grigg: >And if the foundation of Western Witchcraft had come from Islamic >culture then we probably would see them being very closely monitored by >various national governments. Ahem.. John, more thoroughness in your research please. Some links historically exist between the The Witch Hunt and alchemy [1]. And then from the alchemists, you can draw links to Islam and practically any and all religions. The Sufis / alchemists are at home in all religions because they believe that Sufism is the secret teaching within all religions. To them, Islam is a 'shell' of Sufism as equally as other religions are a 'shell' of Sufism. The Sufis were historically persecuted by the Muslims (they didn't define 'Allah' the same way), but that varied over time; other times Islam protected them, so that explains the fact that Sufi thought has an eastern flavor. Plus various concepts like "picture words" [2] were perfect in the Arabic language. Amara References [2] http://www.amara.com/athousand/Onethousandandone.html#picturewords [1] Copying and pasting from my 2 year old post at cosmicvariance on Jul 8th, 2006 at 3:09 pm by me, Amara. http://cosmicvariance.com/2006/07/04/foreign-correspondent-checking-in/#comment-103770 [...] Anyway, I have a hobby-ist interest in the 2000 year historical trail of the alchemists, and have a good reference book at home: Promethean Ambitions by William Newman. Witchcraft and alchemy. It's not a true link in the sense that the Canon Episcopi was written about three centries before the transmission of alchemy from the Islamic world to Europe. The Canon text gives no indication to the aurific art (witchcraft). It was only much later that some sources connected the two. The Canon episcopi written about the 10th century, addresses two claims of the time. The first is that certain heretical women worship the pagan goddess Diana in large groups to which they have been transported over great distances in a single night on the backs of beasts, and the second is that the same women or others can be transformed into animals. The Canon rejects the idea that anyone can really change his shape or species as heretical and forbids the belief in the shape changing power of women. So this document is a reference to witches. About the mid to late thirteenth century, Dominican monk Martinus Polonus wrote in his Margarita decreti encyclopedia an entry for alchemy which begins with the phrase "alchemy seems to be a false art, because he who believes one species to be able to be transferred into another, except by the Creator Himself, is an infidel and worse than a pagan". These words were echoed by subsequent writers and so alchemy and the Canon episcopi was then linked. To clarify definitions: Historically, alchemy is primarily an art of transmutation: one metal is turned into another, one living creature erupts out of the substance of another. Art was defined following Aristotle, which is: to 1) perfect natural processes and to bring them to a state of completion not found in nature itself (i.e. improve), and to 2) only imitate nature without fundamentally altering it, i.e.,. to imitate various aspects of the natural world. So shapeshifting and alchemy was linked by Polonus, but it was not tied to the Devil until the middle 1400s, when a Franciscan monk named Alfonso de Spina analyzed the question of the Canon whether witches can undergo spatial transport at tremendous speed and whether they can change their shape, and he says that only the Devil can do this. He links alchemy and shapeshifting and then with this line: "The cause is that he (the Devil) knows how to apply actives to passives, as appears in those things that the magicians of Pharaoh did. But that the Devil may cause one man to be converted to a serpent, bird, or plant - this is impossible for him. Therefore, many perverse Christian alchemists are decived having pacts with demons, and believing that they transmute iron into gold through their art." De Spina and other monks rejected the idea the nature could be improved upon by 'art', and a large text named Malleus was subsequently written. The text denied the power of witches and gave a denunciation of alchemy. This book went through at least 26 printings between 1487 and 1669 and became the witchhunter's guide. The Devil and demons were endlessly discussed and debated alongside the alchemical art-nature debate. Albertus Manus straddled both sides of the alchemy (pro/against) debate, but it was his student, Thomas Acquinas, who continued strongly Manus' anti-alchemy position. Acquinas' position was that demons were between humans and God, and more powerful than humans. At that time, many of the Medieval arguments against alchemy stemmed from giving demons too much power. Since alchemy represented a high point of the arts in its relationship to nature, it was a useful yardstick to assess the things that demons could or could not do. But the 'transmutation' of the alchemical art-nature debate into one involving demons, then unfortunately led to the Great Witch Hunt. -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Mar 17 00:54:28 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:54:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser><001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Olga said: << I never said all black churches preach this way - many inner city ones have and do (but, certainly, not all the time ... from what I've read someone had to dig deep to find those few remarks of Wright's. Comparing inner city black church rhetoric with Klan rallies is wrong and not helpful in this context. >> I don't think they have to dig too deep. All of these sermons are for sale by the Church so they must be proud of them. Some of them are starting to make their way onto YouTube but I'm sure the Church will claim copyright infringement just like the Scientologists and have YouTube pull them so they don't hurt Obama any worse than they already have. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/03/brian_ross_reports_on_oba mas_c.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGRL0OJWQ&feature=related Olga Said: << Unfortunately, profiting by exploiting people is what churches do. I personally hate to pay taxes to the special exemptions religions institutions get (although - I know it's heresy to say this on this list - I don't mind paying some other taxes). You can add Falwell, Santorum, Billy Graham, Swaggart, and hundreds of other preachers to your list (why single out the ones who happen to be black?). >> Because I've not heard any of these other preachers preach hatred towards blacks or claim that blacks get unfair advantages in jobs and getting into colleges in society because of equal opportunity laws and the quota system. I have heard no white ministers blaming black for bringing AIDS to the United States from Africa. And I have heard no white ministers saying that there are so many blacks in prison that it is bankrupting the United States. If they did they would be preaching Klan Rhetoric and it would make front page news the next day! And yet these are the same problems that Wright blames on whites. And the arguments are just as ridiculous and divisive. And the white preachers you mention do exploit the fear of hell and the guilt of their parishioners to fill the collection plate, but they are not teaching the children to hate their own country and blame all of their problems on people who are of a different color than they are. And that is the part that I consider vile. And what if Obama in his innermost heart believes this vile rhetoric which he was indoctrinated with every Sunday growing up? Was it this rhetoric that motivated him to want to be president? What changes might he have in store for this country? Olga asked: << Isn't free speech wonderful? I never ever stand up for the anthem, and I never ever do the pledge of allegiance myself. Does this make me a traitor? I love it that America can tolerate diverse opinions. Do you think America should not be criticized? >> I agree free speech is wonderful. But a church in order to keep it's tax exempt status must not be a front for a political organization. And yes I feel that America can both tolerate diverse opinions and does need to be criticized when it strays too far from the will of the people and the constitution. But indoctrinating what are essentially political and activist agendas into little children and people who have come to church to hear religion is not religion. It is a misuse of religion to further a political and activist agendas. From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Mar 17 01:11:45 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:11:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: 'Artscience' by David Edwards In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316194619.02434910@satx.rr.com> References: <29666bf30803161139v696a9166p3cb2c28d27fbfd5e@mail.gmail.com> <20080317003000.FXAR7571.hrndva-omta05.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316194619.02434910@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20080317011147.IYFC5710.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 07:51 PM 3/16/2008, you wrote: >At 07:29 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Natasha wrote: > > >>In the arts, the most profound academic movement of the last 30 years > >>has been the rise of theory, which is the creative equivalent of an > >>autopsy, less about culture than about the dissection of culture -- > >>and as such, a kind of cultural death. > > > >I can't make sense of this. Sounds like postmodernist propaganda. > >This is a 180-degree misreading of David L. Ulin's statement. Like >*anti*postmodernist propaganda, if anything. More strictly, I'd say, >antipoststructuralism. I was referring to what he was saying about Edwards. Sorry, I ought to have said, "I can't make sense of Edwards. Sounds like postmodernist propaganda." You are far more knowledgeable than me about the fine lines and wide circles between postmodernism and poststructuralism. I get all tongue-tied when in those waters. Natasha From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Mar 17 01:21:24 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:21:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <200803162256.m2GMuXeD017302@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <200803162256.m2GMuXeD017302@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <00b701c887cd$383015e0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Spike said: << Gary I am disappointed in the vast majority of peaceful believers who do little or nothing to help catch the violent small percentage within their ranks. Seldom do members of the vast majority infiltrate the small fananical groups and help bring them down, even though they would be ideally situated to discover the dangerous ones. I am disappointed in how few thunderous Friday sermons are delivered on how everyone must live in peace with those of other faiths, and the duty to crush those who believe and teach to the contrary. >> I agree! The only ones I hear standing up against the Jihad are the ones who have been murdered for doing so. And there's the rub. If you're not in a terrorist faction yourself, you are a lamb. How then do the lambs protect themselves from the lions? And lions like killing lambs. It spreads fear and sends more Muslims into the fold of the radical clerics where their children can be indoctrinated in terrorism and become the next generation of lions. From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 17 01:37:39 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:37:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> <001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> At 08:54 PM 3/16/2008 -0400, "Gary Miller" wrote: >And the white preachers you mention do exploit the fear of hell and the >guilt of their parishioners to fill the collection plate, but they are not >teaching the children to hate their own country and blame all of their >problems on people who are of a different color than they are. And that is >the part that I consider vile. This is a very odd interpretation of what Wright is quoted as saying in his sermons. Granted, because of the long horrible history of racism in the USA, proportionately more govt decision makers are white than black or some other hue--but are you really claiming that to denounce actions of US governments or corporations is an attack on *Caucasians*? If so, you might be right, but I imagine black military, political and corporate leaders would be angered to hear that their decisions and contributions are obliterated in this way. Damien Broderick From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 17 02:02:22 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:02:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: Spike: >Gary I am disappointed in the vast majority of peaceful believers who do >little or nothing to help catch the violent small percentage within their >ranks. First: I think you were referring to Islam, but don't you think that you could ask the question of the other major religions? You are living inside one of the most religious countries on the planet and the fundamentalists christians are not always peaceful. Second: *How do you know* that "the vast majority of peaceful believers did little or nothing to help catch the violent small percentage within their ranks'? Have you spent time in those countries and seen that to be true? Spent some time with Moslems in their environments? How much do you trust your information sources? I know that I don't trust most US news media for information like that; too many times I found them to be heavily slanted or else wrong when they wrote about Islamic cultures (or any other cultures, for that matter). I don't trust some of the other western countries' media either. Unless I can see with my own eyes the proof for such a statement as what you write above, I can't support it. Amara From msd001 at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 02:04:39 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:04:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com> <008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <62c14240803161904r3f087293j6e68cc4de0da033d@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > People are shot all the time because the police can't be expected to > distinguish between a toy gun and a real one. I also expect them to be able to distinguish between a terrorist and whatever the bias of the week might be. > If I was to walk through an airport carrying a toy gun in my hand I'd be > tackled or shot before I ever made it to the gate and rightfully so. Do you also expect to be gunned down because you happen to have a square bottle of Fiji water in your hand, when the police on have experience with cylindrical water bottles? Or are you going to tell me that you're not allowed to carry liquids through an airport, and that infraction of rules warrants being murdered via misunderstanding? > And I'd like to think that if and when the airlines bans Rolaids as a > potentially dangerous item I will be intelligent enough to leave them at > home. And if I try to smuggle them on the flight anyway just to get my name > in the paper or make a point then go ahead and "take that head shot". I'd > deserve it just for being so stupid. If we're going to start shooting people for being stupid then just admit you've got a plan to significantly reduce the human population. I hate to admit it, but I am enough of a realist to look around. From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Mar 17 01:58:44 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:58:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser><001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000d01c887d2$6f1e0760$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" > This is a very odd interpretation of what Wright is quoted as saying > in his sermons. Granted, because of the long horrible history of > racism in the USA, proportionately more govt decision makers are > white than black or some other hue--but are you really claiming that > to denounce actions of US governments or corporations is an attack on > *Caucasians*? I'm not trying to guess what Gary Miller will say (as he hasn't responded to your question yet). Nevertheless, as an aside, I will say that it's both telling and sad that even in 2008, to many white people "America" and "white people" are somewhat synonymous. Olga From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 17 02:24:44 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:24:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: Mike Dougherty msd001 at gmail.com : >If we're going to start shooting people for being stupid then just admit >you've got a plan to significantly reduce the human population. I hate >to admit it, but I am enough of a realist to look around. "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." --Spinal Tap [1] Amara [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088258/quotes From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 17 02:38:18 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:38:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <000d01c887d2$6f1e0760$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> <001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> <000d01c887d2$6f1e0760$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316212556.024074f8@satx.rr.com> At 06:58 PM 3/16/2008 -0700, Olga wrote: >I will say that it's both telling and sad that >even in 2008, to many white people "America" and "white people" are somewhat >synonymous. Yet one problem with feeling thoroughly outraged about this (as I think we should) is that in realpolitik terms, it *is* overwhelmingly the case. Even in states like Texas and California where the demographics might lead one to expect otherwise. (Maybe less so in the military, although it appears white boys [mostly, *proportionately*) don't sign up, and black and other hues do; but I haven't found good stats.) Damien Broderick From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Mar 17 02:49:14 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:49:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <62c14240803161904r3f087293j6e68cc4de0da033d@mail.gmail.com> References: <001301c88766$efcafa10$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><62c14240803161141o27aa754w77b7b1e12649fc57@mail.gmail.com><008e01c887aa$58f524f0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <62c14240803161904r3f087293j6e68cc4de0da033d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00c501c887d9$7d4bed00$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Mike asked: << Do you also expect to be gunned down because you happen to have a square bottle of Fiji water in your hand, when the police on have experience with cylindrical water bottles? Or are you going to tell me that you're not allowed to carry liquids through an airport, and that infraction of rules warrants being murdered via misunderstanding? If we're going to start shooting people for being stupid then just admit you've got a plan to significantly reduce the human population. I hate to admit it, but I am enough of a realist to look around. >> First of all you can't carry a container of liquid under a certain size through the gate. Once past the security checkpoint you can buy larger containers in the airport shops as long as you don't have to go through security again for a connecting flight at another airport. But if someone was carrying a large square container of water how does security know that it isn't nitroglycerin? Of course shooting at you if your carrying nitro isn't the smartest thing to do either but they would command you to halt and probably draw their guns to let you know they meant business. But if you refused to set the container down and step away from it, they would probably attempt to evacuate the concourse and call in a negotiator. Even if it turned out to be water they could still prosecute you creating a situation and sue you for damages for flight delays caused by your refusal to obey security and violation of security rules. It's hard to plead ignorance because they tell you this stuff when you pick up your ticket. As for people dying because of stupidity look at how many people die due to drunk driving, not knowing the gun was loaded, mixing too many different kinds of pills together, smoking in bed. Stupid people are going to find a way to off themselves anyway. And then there's the people who try to get their king size sex toys through the metal detectors and die of embarrassment. From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 17 02:40:50 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:40:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803170307.m2H37Ub7019757@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Amara Graps > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 7:02 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? > > Spike: > >Gary I am disappointed in the vast majority of peaceful > believers who > >do little or nothing to help catch the violent small > percentage within > >their ranks. > > First: I think you were referring to Islam... Note that I did not specify any particular religion. But when I referred to a violent small percentage of believers, many people do read a particular religion into the message. Why is that? >... but don't you > think that you could ask the question of the other major > religions?... Again, I didn't specify any particular religion, so one could argue that I *was* asking the question of other major religions. Which major religion is most associated with a violent small percentage within its ranks today? Why does it have that association? > You are living inside one of the most religious > countries on the planet and the fundamentalists christians > are not always peaceful... Granted, and I am not defending religion. I consider it bad for the human mind, pretty much all of it. But some are worse than others. Which is major religion is most associated with violence today? Why is that? > ...How much do you trust your information sources? Amara Not much. World "news" media are terrible. Here is where I would go with that. Even if I allow that all religions have a violent small minority, I will not agree that all religions are *equally likely* to produce violent individuals. Within each religion that has sacred scriptures, there is a small minority that believes those sacred scriptures to be given directly by god, and so must be literally true and rigorously obeyed. Of those religious groups with sacred texts, there is one particular religion which has sacred texts which appear to me to give specific justification, or even direct orders, to slay Jews and to make war on unbelievers. I never saw anything like that in the christian scriptures, never saw anything of the kind in the Jewish scriptures. But I do see this in the scriptures of one particular religion, which makes the most fundamentalist believers in that religion a danger to nonbelievers. I know of no outwardly visible way to tell the peaceful majority in that religion from those fundamentalist believers. I cannot attribute all the sordid tales I read in the news to slanted reporting. Some of it perhaps, not all. spike From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Mar 17 03:30:59 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:30:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser><001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00c601c887df$5202c870$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Damien Broderick commented: << This is a very odd interpretation of what Wright is quoted as saying in his sermons. Granted, because of the long horrible history of racism in the USA, proportionately more govt decision makers are white than black or some other hue--but are you really claiming that to denounce actions of US governments or corporations is an attack on *Caucasians*? If so, you might be right, but I imagine black military, political and corporate leaders would be angered to hear that their decisions and contributions are obliterated in this way. >> Damian this was one of the video links I posted. In it he is clearly telling the parishioners that it is rich white Americans who are controlling the country and the culture. He equates the blacks to Jesus and the whites to the rich white Romans who controlled Jesus's country. He goes on to state that Obama knows what it's like to live in a country ruled by rich white people. He then goes on to state that Hillary has not had to work twice as hard to get a passing grade like blacks do. And then he states that is glad that god knows what is like to be a poor black man living in a country and culture ruled by rich white people. He then goes on to say that Jesus has taught him to love his enemies. So since he's only talking about blacks and rich white people guess who the enemies are that he is talking about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM So in Summary Black = Jesus = Poor = Good White = Romans = Rich = Enemies = Bad I listened to this a couple of times and don't see any other way of interpreting this. I personally think he is purposely implying that blacks are powerless in the world today and only by electing Jesus (Obama) will they ever have any power over the evil Romans (Rich White Americans). From mfj.eav at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 03:41:33 2008 From: mfj.eav at gmail.com (Morris Johnson) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 19:41:33 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Longevity Dividend -boomer health care socio-economic policy @ NDP convention Message-ID: <61c8738e0803162041v1f2a8d14r90cc5016b0ac94c7@mail.gmail.com> Just returned from the 2007 Saskatchewan New Democratic Convention. First public chance to begin elicit discussion of the Longevity Dividend. The IEET course is to prepare us to discuss this with media and policy makers. I ran for election in 2007. We were government for 16 years then became opposition with 18/58 seats. This convention was attended by 550 people: members of the legislative assembly, party executive and staff, media and constituency councillors (of which I am one) and members at large. One half day was a series of policy and concerns breakout sessions. We were free to start discussions on any subject related to concerns or specific policy. Of the 60 ideas I set out one. The facilitators termed it "Boomer Health Care Socio-Economic Policy". My actual header on the flip chart was: "The Longevity Dividend".. How enhanced medical technologies will effect the boomers" health care, pensions and work options if the healthy lifespan more closely approaches full lifespan. The topics were spread through several assembly rooms and delegates could move freely from session to session and contribute or observe as they saw fit. We had several permanent and a few transient participants. We first discussed the header to ensure that the topic was clear. We had the former health minister among the participants. One reaction to longer average lifespan to date is the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pension plans. It was felt that people could contribute both paid and unpaid work to the economy as well as ideas well past their 70's. Healthy elderly were termed a positive thing. The question was posed...what to do when deferred savings for projected 20 or 30 year payouts would have to finance perhaps 50 years of pension. As pension plans become insolvent what happens.. does government reduce the benefits in anticipation or wait and see what the electorate directs. It was felt that voters would have to be educated that pensions are only a part of a retirement plan and that government might not have to be responsible to fund shortfalls....other solutions would have to be found. The Saskatchewan pharmacare program when planned was not fundable for a birth to death coverage so the advice was to fund only persons over 65. This rationed services to match the funding to be provided. It was stated that the last 6 months of life are the most costly for public funders. It was questioned if the funding made avaliable to various health services is designed to follow the pay-in curve (those likely to live long enough and well enough to repay by future taxation would have the easiest access). Would this mean that others would be somehow excluded for services and groups for whom the prospects for cost recovery through things like future taxation were poor would be also excluded.. Participants were informed that this can go to great extremes. The example of Oregon's ranks procedures and criteria 1-well over 613 but only pays for 1-613. If your criteria put you in the over 613 group then you will pay yourself or be allowed to die of natural causes. We in Saskatchewan have Health Quality Council. MD's identify high risk diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk persons and sask health works to fund MD's to use certain preventative diagnosis, medication and procedures. We were told that 5 million was added to fund this program. Unasked question was...just how many people would it take to max out the funding for this risk assessment plus. The saskatchewan medical association agreed to allow funding a certain number of patients. My "HACCP For Humans" term was agreed to be the sort of wording to summarize the concept. The health minister said "it's not expensive to do preventative medicine". I have seen the QALY calculations for such things as modest cost HPV screening come up with very high QALY costing because the formula multiplies the cost by the number of procedures required before a single death is prevented on a population basis. I don't think the paricipants were aware of the exact way the math works, but time did not permit going into this. Government often likes to advertise preventative medicine but the media beats them up based on the cost of the individual adds and ignores the proposed savings to medicare which is the intended result. Electronic Health records were proposed to help increase the effectiveness of preventative medicine but are not fully in place. Insurance corporations agree and will do the management for a percentage of the cost savings the system realizes . 30% was mentioned. I mentioned that individual health decisions are increasingly forbidden by law and regulation by health canada.. I posed the question as to who should be given final say as to what an individual coulsd or could not access by thermselves. Conversation moved to the cost of technology. I asked.. at what age do you cut off access or do you use biomarkers instead. Answer wes "in saskatchewan we try to accomodate everybody". It was stated that pension funds are the largest shareholders of many large corporations, pharmaceutical companies and medical device corporatiopns. These relationships ask for 20$ return and at times are part of a closed loop of cash flow. How do public plans deal with provisioning when some products are in loops their taxpayers are in and some are ones where the profits go outside the province. "saskatchewan has a base plan". This question needed more discussion. It was related that some areas of saskatchewan had something like a health plan 15 years before medicare. Some participants seemed to relate more to older therapies so someone mentioned "new technology is endless and the costs are exponential" Avastin was mentioned. This is rationed to 80 of 250 colon cancer patients based on criteria. Are there better alternatives to make access fully universal. It was mentioned that some patients have better relatives , doctors or are better to lobby for access and get it. Everybody might agree to some rationing, except if it applies to them or their loved ones. How does medicare deal with forcing the rationing of things not in the system such as alternative medicines. Regulators use the force of law to ration acces but is this ethical. We were limited by time and rules of order..no interruptions etc. Morris. -- LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc. Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. 306-447-4944 701-240-9411 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 Transhumanism ..."The most dangerous idea on earth" -Francis Fukuyama, June 2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 03:49:32 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:19:32 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> > > Lee wrote: > Suppose that in a given tribe there really are genetic differences between > the early risers and late risers. (I don't know if this is the case---I didn't > follow all the URLs, and no one here so far has given me a Y or a N.) Y The original URLs I posted were about the genetic differences (a gene called Per3 seems to regulate early/late rising). > Then the population biologist has to ask, "How can that be? Why didn't > whichever one that had even the slightest selective advantage come to > predominate? Why, for example, didn't the early risers take charge > and create the best opportunities for themselves and leave less for the > late ones?" That's really hard to answer. The best stab at it that I could see was the "sneaky fuckers" explanation (kudos Damien for nomenclature) - that staying up late gets you more access to sex and so increases your fitness, but I'll add to this that this strategy probably works best in a mostly early riser environment. Presumably there's an upper bound. The model might be something like the tit-for-tat vs pure defectors equilibrium. I'd posit the early risers as the norm, and the late risers as the "defectors". So, I'd also posit that the late risers are relatively few compared to early risers, and are taking advantage of an environment which is mostly early risers. > But we (I take it) seem to have an equilibrium: that is, there may be > about the same number of each. Equilibrium isn't 50/50, it's wherever the ratio is stable. I haven't read any information on the actual ratio (although my guess is it's mostly early risers, few late risers, pure guess). The original study I posted actually selected for extremes of both types, and thus the ratios in the experiment probably can't tell us anything about the general ratio. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 17 03:51:38 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:51:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <00c501c887d9$7d4bed00$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <200803170351.m2H3pdVB012411@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Gary Miller > ...And then there's the people who try to > get their king size sex toys through the metal detectors and > die of embarrassment. Hmm, Gary I think you meant queen sized. But speaking of sex toys, I had a comment about the New York politician who was caught with the high priced harlot. Back a few years ago, I made note of a Hollywood product called "Titanic." Historical fiction about the ill fated ship of the same name of course, but there was a sub plot that really caught my attention. The evil controlling mother forbade the heroine daughter from smoking, although she herself smoked. Same with evil controlling boyfriend. So the plucky girl smoked anyway, and in the movie, broke free of their evil influence, smoked, lived long and prospered. My notion at the time was that the movie would inspire countless teenage girls to smoke. Some would suffer lung cancer and emphysema as a result. Therefore the movie may have (indirectly) slain more than the ship. This New York politician whose name I have already forgotten, called attention to something of which I was not aware and would not have believed in my wildest imagination: that some harlots get thousands of dollars for their services. Before I heard that, I would have assumed the desperate junkie truckstop whores get about twenty or thirty dollars, the premium variety maybe a hundred and those who make housecalls or perform dangerous or specialty tasks, perhaps two hundred to three hundred dollars. Suddenly I am smacked with the revelation that some can get *thousands* of dollars (THOUSANDS!) Well now. Even *I* am rethinking my own career options. (Then of course I realize that I could not even give it away.) But the New York politician has called attention to and glamourized a dangerous old profession that will likely get a wave of new applicants, now that they realize that they might become millionaires in a week, should hook up with the right customer. The harlot sold a million dollars worth of downloads of her singing, and landed a big contract with one of the major porno channels. Rags to riches, overnight. We saw the photo of the woman, who was better than average looking I will grant, but I saw nothing there that would justify the premium price. Surely many attractive young women (who may already do dangerous sexual practices, just for fun) will now decide they can take on this trollop one on one in a beauty or sex contest. They may take a hard look at their present career path, perhaps slaving away at a hopeless nine to five in a cubicle, needing a YEAR to save the amount this other woman earned in an hour. Harlotry brings its practitioners into contact with the unsavory crowd, bad influences and dangerous lifestyles, beatings, risk of disease and addiction, etc. I predict lives will be shortened or lost. If I were to make a rough order of magnitude estimate, it would be about a thousand lives a year lost, from the New York governor's actions calling attention to the fact that some harlots get thousands an hour. Ironically, the publicity may create a huge new supply, bringing down the price sharply for premium harlots. Could this be the end of extreme high cost prostitution? Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that harlotry could be this lucrative? spike From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 03:52:02 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:22:02 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803162052n38d487fem3bddfab139e359fc@mail.gmail.com> On 17/03/2008, PJ Manney wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > I need to remind everyone (whether they need it or not)(as I say > > "I need") that developing a genetic explanation always requires > > a selective advantage, and since we seem to have here an > > equilibrium, it's that which needs to be explained too. E.g., > > what if there are too many early risers, how does that increase > > the number of viable offspring of the late risers and vice-versa. > > What about simply, the early birds take the early shift and the night > owls take the late shift? Between the two, you cover a larger set of > hours, get more accomplished and have someone on deck either > protecting the tribe or getting stuff done. That's how it is in our > house. (I'm the night owl, BTW, although that's only in comparison to > my spouse.) > > PJ That's group selection. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 17 03:58:51 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:58:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <00c601c887df$5202c870$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <00f001c88731$170e2790$d75de547@thebigloser> <001a01c8876d$034e5770$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <000501c88782$04a6aef0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <008d01c887a6$052b16d0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <002301c887ac$9a194090$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <00ad01c887c9$77d393b0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316202637.0242b5e0@satx.rr.com> <00c601c887df$5202c870$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316224547.0246f648@satx.rr.com> At 11:30 PM 3/16/2008 -0400, Gary Miller wrote: >Damian this was one of the video links I posted. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM >In it he is clearly >telling the parishioners that it is rich white Americans who are controlling >the country and the culture. Amazing! Whereas, *proportionately*, it's actually... who? The poor green Martians? >He then goes on to say that >Jesus has taught him to love his enemies. So since he's only talking about >blacks and rich white people guess who the enemies are that he is talking >about. Look again. I don't know anything more about this guy than a few news snippets and what I just saw on that rather rousing video, but it's obvious that he's not what anyone with cone receptors would spontaneously call "black"--and his anger at the end is clearly directed at those bigots (his word) of his own community who presumably have said he's "not black enough" and, also presumably, that Obama is not black enough. Hillary, he points out, "has never had her own people say she's not white enough." (Of course, he's neglecting the many humans of all hues who tell her that she's "not male enough," but also "not youthful and pretty enough," and that she's "too male".) Take another look. Get it? Damien Broderick From aiguy at comcast.net Mon Mar 17 04:06:35 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:06:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <200803170351.m2H3pdVB012411@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <00c501c887d9$7d4bed00$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <200803170351.m2H3pdVB012411@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <00cd01c887e4$4ba69240$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Spike asked: << Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that harlotry could be this lucrative? >> I seem to remember Heidi Fleiss getting about $1000 a night for the girls she set up appointments for. But then again that's West Coast rates and for a full night. Everybody knows that Washington is the land of $250 hammers, and $4000 toilets so it makes sense that a screw is bound to cost more also. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 04:12:56 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:42:56 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803162112k827df62pdf6f9ec06d37af74@mail.gmail.com> On 17/03/2008, Emlyn wrote: > The best stab at it that I could see was > the "sneaky fuckers" explanation (kudos Damien for nomenclature) Damien corrected me offlist, this is a technical term! There are a lot of passing references online, here's one: http://www.universityaffairs.ca/issues/2008/february/_print/buzz_bees.html -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 04:14:20 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:44:20 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <6a13bb8f0803140710p34f7dab2r95dec0e612d1ec96@mail.gmail.com> <47DAB71C.5010604@posthuman.com> <580930c20803160726k429d8a9as5617a3c8a323a716@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803162114l83498efu450eb6cecf5c5103@mail.gmail.com> On 17/03/2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > I am very sensitive to this issue, because while I have never been > insomniac (I usually fall asleep as soon as I hit the bed) it appears > that my biological clock is regulated on a day of 25 hours, meaning > that I have to adjust to a one-hour jet-lag each and every day. Not > too pleasant indeed. > > In fact, I love when I travel westward, because for a while my > suffering is decreased for a while... Maybe you could try the 28 hour day? http://xkcd.com/320/ -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 17 04:18:09 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:18:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.co m> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316231250.024a8c18@satx.rr.com> At 02:19 PM 3/17/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >my guess is it's >mostly early risers, few late risers, pure guess) My guess is that there'd be a fantastically large proportion of INTJs among the night owls. My wife and me, for starters. But then we don't have screaming kids, and Barbara's managed to organize her own business in such a way that her deplorably late nights don't kill her; a lark staff helps a lot, and her capacity to thrive on about two or three hours less sleep a day than I can. Damien Broderick From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 17 04:24:28 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:24:28 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: Spike: >Of those religious groups with sacred texts, there is one particular >religion which has sacred texts which appear to me to give specific >justification, or even direct orders, to slay Jews and to make war on >unbelievers. I never saw anything like that in the christian >scriptures, never saw anything of the kind in the Jewish scriptures. (After a party game where we discovered that the Trivial Pursuit question gave the blatantly wrong answer: "Amen" for "the most common word in the Bible") Even though there exists debate upon what actually is the most common word in the Bible (the top-five Google hits for "most common word in the Bible" return five different words, which claim to be number 1), we know that "Amen" is not it, and that the Bible is not a book of bedtime stories that you would want to read to your 3-year-old at night. o 'The most common word in the Bible is a Hebrew word "shalom".' o 'Ignoring simple words and including variations, "smite" is the most common word in the Bible.' o 'The term *righteousness* is, perhaps, the most common word in the Bible.' o 'The word "Blood" is the second most common word in the Bible, after "God."' Just because a preacher doesn't quote violent scriptures, that doesn't mean that such scriptures don't exist. A book with overwhelming instances of "blood" and "righteousness" and "smite" is not a peaceful document. Amen! Amara http://www.trivia-library.com/a/bible-numbers-and-statistics.htm -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 17 04:26:55 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:26:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: <188901c887e7$290e7e70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Regarding Muslims, and how we treat them, here is a piece by Pat Condell http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=29200_Condell-_Appeasing_Islam&only Lee From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 04:28:35 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:58:35 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316231250.024a8c18@satx.rr.com> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080316231250.024a8c18@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803162128q2397cfffi2c7b1863c942ef86@mail.gmail.com> On 17/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 02:19 PM 3/17/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > > >my guess is it's > >mostly early risers, few late risers, pure guess) > > My guess is that there'd be a fantastically large proportion of INTJs > among the night owls. My wife and me, for starters. But then we don't > have screaming kids, and Barbara's managed to organize her own > business in such a way that her deplorably late nights don't kill > her; a lark staff helps a lot, and her capacity to thrive on about > two or three hours less sleep a day than I can. > > Damien Broderick The studies I linked originally said that the late risers were more likely to be creative types, versus linear, logical types for early rising. Is it possibly that this is the myers-briggs N/S dimension, S=>early, N=>late? (FWIW, my family are all night owls, all Ns (me: ENTP, my wife: INFP, my daughter: INTP, my son: ENTJ). Whereas Granny, who I think is ESTJ, is an early riser. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 17 04:48:34 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:48:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <18a201c887ea$ac9322c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Emlyn writes >> > Lee wrote: >> Suppose that in a given tribe there really are genetic differences between >> the early risers and late risers. (I don't know if this is the case---I didn't >> follow all the URLs, and no one here so far has given me a Y or a N.) > > Y Thank you very much. > The original URLs I posted were about the genetic differences (a gene > called Per3 seems to regulate early/late rising). I see. > [Lee also continued (at Sunday, March 16, 2008 11:50 AM)] > >> Then the population biologist has to ask, "How can that be? Why didn't >> whichever one that had even the slightest selective advantage come to >> predominate? Why, for example, didn't the early risers take charge >> and create the best opportunities for themselves and leave less for the >> late ones?" > > That's really hard to answer. Of course it is. Or the EP types would have it licked. >> But we (I take it) seem to have an equilibrium: that is, there may be >> about the same number of each. > > Equilibrium isn't 50/50, it's wherever the ratio is stable. Oh, yes. I didn't mean to imply that equibrium is 50/50. I should have used the phrase "For example, there may be about the same number of each." Thanks for the correction. > I haven't read any information on the actual ratio (although my > guess is it's mostly early risers, few late risers, pure guess). The > original study I posted actually selected for extremes of both types, > and thus the ratios in the experiment probably can't tell us > anything about the general ratio. Well, my only point is that *any* ratio that is not 1:0 or 0:1 means that we would very much like to explain the equilibrium too. Studies ought to be conducted on local native populations to see how it depends on race and racial-subgroup. It won't be easy, because it's hard to believe that it's *entirely* genetic. For example, when I was 29 I knew that I had to go get a real job soon, and I happened to be reading "David Copperfield". The very young man would get up two hours before work started, in order to give him some small extra competitive advantage in some way, (I forget what). Well, I began immitating him, going out at the crack of dawn to get a newspaper and go through the want adds in case I was thereby able to be the first to contact a potential employer. I *think* that this had to do with me being an early riser for the next 25 or 30 years, because it just felt "more responsible" or something. I actually believed that I was a morning person. To this day, I have no solid idea whether I'm a "morning person" or an "evening person", "afternoon person" or what, nor have I a good clue as to whether by preference I'd be an early riser or a late riser were I alone in the world, and had no responsibilities to society or to others. Thanks again for the info, Emlyn. Lee From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 17 05:50:18 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:50:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803170550.m2H5oIBj014271@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Amara Graps > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 9:24 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [ExI] Feel Safer Now? > ... > > (After a party game where we discovered that the Trivial > Pursuit question gave the blatantly wrong answer: "Amen" for > "the most common word in the Bible") ... > and that the Bible is not a book of bedtime stories that you > would want to read to your 3-year-old at night. > > o 'The most common word in the Bible is a Hebrew word "shalom".' > > o 'Ignoring simple words and including variations, "smite" is > the most common word in the Bible.' > > o 'The term *righteousness* is, perhaps, the most common word > in the Bible.' > > o 'The word "Blood" is the second most common word in the > Bible, after "God."' > > Just because a preacher doesn't quote violent scriptures, > that doesn't mean that such scriptures don't exist. A book > with overwhelming instances of "blood" and "righteousness" > and "smite" is not a peaceful document. > > Amen! > Amara > > http://www.trivia-library.com/a/bible-numbers-and-statistics.htm > > -- > > Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Granted the bible has some terrible stuff in it, truly awful. But I sure didn't recall that many smites. I looked at the online Strong's concordance: http://cf.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=smite&t =KJV&sf=5 This site yields 125 smites, 447 bloods, 306 righteousnesses, 117 slays, 126 kills, 7970 lords, 4473 gods, 2737 mans, 2540 kings, 78 amens, 448 sins, 172 sinses, or 620 if we combine sin and sins. Hey cool, there are 620 sins? I haven't tried out even half that many. spike From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Mar 17 05:57:42 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:57:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? References: <00c501c887d9$7d4bed00$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><200803170351.m2H3pdVB012411@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <00cd01c887e4$4ba69240$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <004801c887f3$d138ea70$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Gary Miller" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 9:06 PM << Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that harlotry could be this lucrative? >> Don't forget that even these days ... there are still far too many women who marry for money (whether they like to acknowledge this to themselves or not). Don't get me started on this subject :). Harlotry has *nothing* on many bona-fide wifeys. Olga From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 10:09:45 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:09:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] David Pearce in Second Life on Utopian Neuroscience, March 23 Message-ID: <470a3c520803170309m6d32f5d5o76bd7db90181c88a@mail.gmail.com> http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/david_pearce_in_second_life_on_utopian_neuroscience_march_23/ David Pearce, co-founder of the WTA and creator of HedWeb (The Hedonistic Imperative), will give a talk and a Q/A session in Second Life on March 23, 10am SLT, on Utopian Neuroscience. A summary of David's talk is on his website Superhappiness. David promotes nothing less than the abolition of suffering in all sentient life. He argues that the abolition of suffering can be accomplished through Paradise Engineering (The Hedonistic Imperative). David will try to distinguish between the Abolitionist Project -i.e. getting rid of suffering, from a much more controversial claim: "I predict that our superintelligent descendants will be animated by gradients of bliss orders of magnitude richer than anything physiologically accessible today". Wikipedia: "David Pearce is a British philosopher and negative utilitarian. He promotes the abolition of suffering in all sentient life. His book-length internet manifesto The Hedonistic Imperative[1] details how he believes the abolition of suffering can be accomplished through "paradise engineering". A transhumanist vegan, Pearce also calls for the elimination of cruelty to animals. Among his websites, there are many devoted to the plight of animals". Don't miss this event! SUNDAY March 23 10am - 12am SLT SL-Transhumanists @ Extropia Core From aleksei at iki.fi Mon Mar 17 11:41:43 2008 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:41:43 +0200 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices Message-ID: <1db0b2da0803170441p71d486a7ucf0140f2493b2c88@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:51 AM, spike wrote: > Ironically, the publicity may create a huge new supply, bringing > down the price sharply for premium harlots. Could this be the end > of extreme high cost prostitution? Most definitely not. Consider the high prices of some designer clothing and such. People being willing to pay those prices has nothing to do with the "objective quality" of the product. ("Objective quality" meaning, that if you gave the most expensive handbags or whatever to someone who didn't know they were that expensive, that person would be unable to distinguish a difference in quality between the very expensive product and some other, more reasonably priced products.) People pay huge sums for high-end luxury goods because of status games and such. If the products weren't so very expensive and exclusive, people wouldn't find nearly as much satisfaction in purchasing them. > Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) > How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week > that harlotry could be this lucrative? I for one am surprised that some are surprised by this. A couple of thousand for an hour most probably isn't even among the most expensive sexual services. I would assume many celebrities and such have made an order of magnitude or two more from selling their short-term sexual services. An interesting question is, when will we see the first incidence of someone *publicly* selling short-term sexual services for $10k or $100k? (Or even millions, when talking about the biggest celebrities.) It becomes an ever better way to cash out on fame, as values become more and more socially liberal. -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 17 13:09:11 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:09:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The art of rhetoric Message-ID: <8CA564739F9AC61-F7C-26CC@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> "Martin Luther King preached this in a sermon (about the Vietnam war) in 1967" : "Don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as His divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America: 'You are too arrogant! If you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power." _______________ Judgement of right or wrong is a mistake in thinking. Martin Luther King is invoking the name of God Almighty to make America change the use of military power against Vietnam. His intent is right to influence the US to stop the war. Pres. Johnson did stop the war not because God told him so but reason seem to override the belief which MLK used in his speech. Art appeals to emotions. Poetry, music, literature and paintings are expressions of human aspirations but to use art as propaganda destroys the appeal and may lead the irrational mind to irrationality. On another note, is there art in science or does science need art? Science as the study of how nature works need reason more than art. To understand consciousness or brain/mind behavior including emotional responses to stimuli will use art in technology but are these two functions depend on scientific discoveries more than the other way around? There is art in philosophy as in religion. Both disciplines use art but philosophy use reason as well and religion use fear entirely at the expense of everything else. Some scientific discoveries happen by chance sans reason and art. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 17 13:22:04 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:22:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Correction: re: Art in rhetoric Message-ID: <8CA564906DD4453-F7C-2787@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> Sorry my finger is faster than the mind in typing this post so in rereading the second paragraph I failed to insert the word immature minds or minds prone to emotionality. Hence the second paragraph of today's post should read as below. "Art appeals to emotions. Poetry, music, literature and paintings are expressions of human aspirations but to use art as propaganda destroys the appeal and may lead the "immature minds or minds prone to emotionality." I guess it takes practice to be aware of mistakes, Terry From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 17 13:39:08 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:39:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Mistakes in thinking Message-ID: <8CA564B68D35BFF-F7C-288E@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> It happened again and again in my first and second posts here today there are some words omitted due to my multitasking {listening to the news while typing my posts}. I trust the readers noted the omitted word if not here it is in the same second paragraph is the word appeal to "reason". I formed the habit of typing directly my thoughts without editing first in a separate paper. That happens because I'm in a hurry to do a lot of things within the day. Got to go, Terry From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 17 14:26:09 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:26:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Non-European PhDs In Germany In-Reply-To: <8CA564B68D35BFF-F7C-288E@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803171426.m2HEQAfk017064@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Posted forward for reinhard H: Since march 6 the phd and the german dr. are pari passu. so everyone with a phd is legally called dr. Verd?chtige Genies http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,541523,00.html "Alarmiert von den Ermittlungsverfahren, beschlossen die Kultusminister in Berlin, dem Spuk ein Ende zu bereiten. Amerikaner mit Ph.D. d?rfen sich Dr. nennen und heimisch werden. Das ist als Willkommensgru? gemeint." best regards, reinhard Reinhard H. [reinhard.heil at googlemail.com] From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 17 14:35:29 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:35:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The art of rhetoric In-Reply-To: <8CA564739F9AC61-F7C-26CC@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803171502.m2HF29tC002315@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > citta437 at aol.com ... > Subject: [ExI] The art of rhetoric > > "Martin Luther King preached this in a sermon (about the > Vietnam war) in 1967"... > _______________ > > ... > America change the use of military power against Vietnam. His > intent is right to influence the US to stop the war. Pres. > Johnson did stop the war ... > Terry Terry, I might need to check my history books, but as I recall that war was going strong in January 1969 when Johnson left office. It was Kennedy who started that one, Johnson who escalated it, and Nixon who stopped it. spike From kevin at kevinfreels.com Mon Mar 17 14:43:34 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:43:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls Message-ID: <20080317074334.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.7b6b167547.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Mon Mar 17 14:56:47 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:56:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect Message-ID: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net> This is important information. Ghod knows what this psychological trait had to do with reproductive success in the stone age, but you can be assured it did. Keith http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/16/AR2008031602168.html Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect By Shankar Vedantam Monday, March 17, 2008; Page A03 In Eliot Spitzer's sex scandal and tragicomic downfall, the question that bugged many people did not have to do with ethics or politics, but whether Spitzer got a raw deal. What does someone like Spitzer get when he pays a prostitute $5,000, as opposed to $500 or $50? Could sex with one prostitute really be 10 times better or 100 times better than sex with another? The revelation of the true identity of "Kristen" -- the woman with whom the former New York governor allegedly shared a $1,000-an-hour Mayflower Hotel tryst in February -- only complicated matters. Now people could calculate what they would have done in Spitzer's shoes. Spitzer's poor moral, political and legal judgment is beyond question, but on the delicate question of whether Kristen might have been "worth it," a host of unusual studies suggest the governor probably would have gotten his money's worth. The question, as it turns out, has little to do with either Kristen or prostitution, and nearly everything to do with Spitzer himself. Specifically, an area of Spitzer's brain known as the medial orbitofrontal cortex. This part of the brain makes judgments about pleasure, and intriguing new research has found that the price people pay for something can subtly and unconsciously change how much pleasure they derive from it. The medial orbitofrontal cortex research suggests that, contrary to conventional wisdom, people who buy something at a discount may unconsciously derive less satisfaction than people who pay full price, or a premium, for the very same thing. "I definitely think it is the same phenomenon with Spitzer," said Baba Shiv, a Stanford University behavioral economist, who was part of a team of researchers who studied the medial orbitofrontal cortex. The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Shiv and his colleagues studied not prostitution but another domain where the pleasure that people derive from their purchases is subjective and prone to personal expectations: wine drinking. Along with California Institute of Technology neuro-economist Antonio Rangel and others, Shiv had people evaluate two bottles of wine, priced at $10 and $90. What the volunteers did not realize was that the wine in the expensive and cheap bottles was the same. A host of studies have previously shown that people's judgments about quality are powerfully influenced by price. Because of a general assumption that expensive things have higher quality, people have been shown to value everything from clothing to food more highly when the price is marked up, compared with when the same items are cheap. Shiv and his colleagues expected the subjects would say the expensive wine was better, and this was exactly what they found. What surprised the researchers, however, was that when they conducted a brain-imaging study of the wine tasters, they found that people who drank the more expensive wine had a larger activation in their medial orbitofrontal cortex. In other words, the subjects were not reporting that the expensive wine was better merely because they figured it ought to be better. Rather, they were actually experiencing more pleasure when they drank a bottle of wine priced at $90, compared with when they drank the same wine from a $10 bottle. Shiv called this phenomenon the price-placebo effect, because of its similarity with the placebo effect in medicine: When people think they are getting medication but actually get sugar pills, they sometimes experience the side effects and benefits of the real drug. Nor is the phenomenon limited to questions of medicine or pleasure. In an earlier study published in the Journal of Marketing Research, Shiv and his colleagues presented volunteers with a series of word puzzles. All the volunteers were given an "energy drink" that was said to boost mental acuity. The catch was that some volunteers were asked to buy the drink at full price -- $1.89 -- while the others got the drink at a discount: 89 cents. The researchers made clear the drinks were identical; the people getting the discount were told the cheaper price was because of a bulk purchase. When asked to unscramble words such as T-U-P-P-I-L (pulpit) and B-E-R-K-A-M (embark), people who paid full price were able to solve nearly twice as many puzzles as those who got the discount. "The price-placebo effect comes from the fact that you form this global belief that low price equals low quality," Shiv said. Part of what changes when people pay more is their own psychological investment. A wine connoisseur who pays extra feels different from someone who pays less for the same bottle of wine, because the larger financial investment increases the motivation to be satisfied. Among word-puzzle solvers, the people who got the energy drink at a discount were more likely to throw in the towel when the going got tough. Those who paid full price hung in there -- and their persistence paid off. The research raises a philosophical question that is at least as interesting as the salacious Spitzer scandal: If you paid a premium for something, and as a result derived more pleasure and value from it, does this mean you were ripped off or that you actually got a better deal than the person who got a discount? This mind-bending question prompted Shiv to make an important change in his own life: He now asks his wife to buy the wine. From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 15:47:35 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:47:35 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect In-Reply-To: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net> References: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 2:56 PM, hkhenson wrote: > > This is important information. Ghod knows what this psychological > trait had to do with reproductive success in the stone age, but you > can be assured it did. Keith > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/16/AR2008031602168.html > > Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect > By Shankar Vedantam > Monday, March 17, 2008; Page A03 > This effect is mentioned in the book about irrational behaviour I mentioned in my post yesterday. Currently No.5 in the New York Times Hardcover Nonfiction Best Seller List. See: Do you know why we still have a headache after taking a five-cent aspirin, but why that same headache vanishes when the aspirin costs 50 cents? Do you know why we sometimes find ourselves excitedly buying things we don't really need? According to Ariely, our understanding of economics, now based on the assumption of a rational subject, should, in fact, be based on our systematic, unsurprising irrationality. Ariely argues that greater understanding of previously ignored or misunderstood forces (emotions, relativity and social norms) that influence our economic behavior brings a variety of opportunities for reexamining individual motivation and consumer choice, as well as economic and educational policy. BillK From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 17 19:02:07 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:02:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The role of Genes and Environment Message-ID: <8CA567888010086-1010-90A@WEBMAIL-DF04.sysops.aol.com> Spike:"> You are living inside one of the most religious > countries on the planet and the fundamentalists christians > are not always peaceful... Granted, and I am not defending religion. I consider it bad for the human mind, pretty much all of it. But some are worse than others. Which is major religion is most associated with violence today? Why is that? > ...How much do you trust your information sources? Amara Spike: "Not much. World "news" media are terrible. _____________ Why blame the media, religion or society in general? Individuals make up society and some individuals are at the mercy of their genes and environment. No one knows how much influence an environment or genes have on our behaviors. Modern technology and medicine help us live a healthy life style but we still have to work a sweat to obtain what is needed to attain that goal. I don't blame either or both the genes or the environment. Genes do what they do best to mutate. Mistakes in thinking can be corrected if we spend time to practice moment to moment awareness which is hard to do because we are not yet perfect like gods. Our brains are not solid like rocks thankfully but flexible most of the time. If we dissect the brain matter it has the gray upper layer and the white lower layer where structures like the amygdala according to neurobiologists is the seat of our emotion. All stimuli coming in thru the five senses has to pass thru this structure before it reach the cortex/gray matter where thoughts are generated. MRI showed a large amygdala when emotions like fear is generated when a violent image appeared. Depending on the maturation process of an individual, those who are prone to fight or flight do so due to the production of adrenalin hormone as the message/stimuli were relayed to the cortical neurons which have no direct connection to the outside environment. It takes some milleseconds for the individual's cortex to process the message because it has to access memories from the cortex that stored memories. Recent studies of individuals born with small brain{ forgot the medical term} act like some chimps with no learning abilities. My point is we cannot blame the genes or the environment for the varieties of genetic defects manifested as criminal behavior or sickness. In Zen, there is no belief in sin. What religion or society call sin or immorality is just a mistake in thinking. Terry From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Mon Mar 17 19:38:54 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:38:54 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] money & harlotry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <873617.21148.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Olga wrote: >Don't forget that even these days ... there are still >far too many women who >>marry for money (whether they like to acknowledge this to themselves or >not). Don't get me started on this subject :). >Harlotry has *nothing* on many bona-fide wifeys. And today, Paul McCartney's divorce sets a new UK record. (A great many jokes have been made at both Paul & Heather's expense, most of them in very bad taste). Harlotry of the famous? British model Sophie Anderton (who was a top lingerie model and the "face" of several big advertising campaigns) got addicted to cocaine, and sold herself for ?10,000 (or $20,000 in today's money) to wealthy Arabs to pay the habit. As for Eliot Spitzer paying a couple of grand for sex with someone of only moderately above average attractiveness - he's not paying for kinky services or beauty. He's paying for discretion. He paid over the odds for a service where they'd never leak a client's name, no matter how famous, and never try to blackmail a client, no matter how wealthy. This prostitution ring only gave over its client details when the police raided them. Likewise, Heidi Fleiss's Hollywood client list was completely secret until the LADP arrested her. When you cannot afford public scandal but need your fix of sexual services for cash, you need people who are that discreet and you need to make it worth their while. Tom ___________________________________________________________ Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From hkhenson at rogers.com Mon Mar 17 21:35:20 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:35:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <18a201c887ea$ac9322c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <710b78fc0803140634p2d269191wd5117f1ae36521d0@mail.gmail.com> <481053.73922.qm@web65406.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0803141716p373169bfv46bcea73fcd6eede@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314202623.02564d50@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0803142019v3167b6b7x83c14f1f6e9f89b3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080314223311.02335330@satx.rr.com> <011401c88658$19b426e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <29666bf30803160914r69b8a2c5t5f0bb695588d6cb0@mail.gmail.com> <182901c88796$91b37300$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> <18a201c887ea$ac9322c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <1205789798_9854@S4.cableone.net> At 09:48 PM 3/16/2008, Lee wrote: > >> Then the population biologist has to ask, "How can that be? Why didn't > >> whichever one that had even the slightest selective advantage come to > >> predominate? Why, for example, didn't the early risers take charge > >> and create the best opportunities for themselves and leave less for the > >> late ones?" > > > > That's really hard to answer. There are two choices. Either there is little to no evolutionary advantage to either one, or there is an advantage to being of the less common type. This is what keeps MHC genes in flux, there is always an advantage to being the less common version because your MHC genes (and blood type genes) contribute to parasite and disease resistance. >Of course it is. Or the EP types would have it licked. The same rules apply to all physical and psychological traits humans have, modified by the fact that we may not be well adapted to the current environment. Keith From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 22:18:42 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:18:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <004801c887f3$d138ea70$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <00c501c887d9$7d4bed00$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <200803170351.m2H3pdVB012411@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <00cd01c887e4$4ba69240$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <004801c887f3$d138ea70$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <2d6187670803171518j29482e0ch8812af3de225820f@mail.gmail.com> Spike wrote: Harlotry brings its practitioners into contact with the unsavory crowd, bad influences and dangerous lifestyles, beatings, risk of disease and addiction, etc. I predict lives will be shortened or lost. If I were to make a rough order of magnitude estimate, it would be about a thousand lives a year lost, from the New York governor's actions calling attention to the fact that some harlots get thousands an hour. Ironically, the publicity may create a huge new supply, bringing down the price sharply for premium harlots. Could this be the end of extreme high cost prostitution? Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that harlotry could be this lucrative? >>>> I remember watching a cable news special report about prostitution and they discussed beautiful young American and European women who had "serviced" Saudi princes (an extreme example I admit) who would make 25 grand or more for a 24 hour period. But this was seen as giving a false impression to these girls that all such "high-end" prostitution could be so luxurious and rewarding. When I used to be a manager in the hospitality business we had a wealthy gentleman visit occasionally who I befriended and we had a frank talk about how as an older man he would go about satisfying his sexual desires. He had no shame in admitting that he paid for sex and this man actually showed me on his computer the website he used to find ladies to "take care of him." It almost looked like a personals website with pictures of young and not so young women (wearing clothes!) who went from being just mildly attractive to really gorgeous (it took a password to get in the website). And the rates varied but some went for several thousand dollars + plus (for just an hour). I was totally floored that he could be so blase` about it and that he would spend such large sums for sex. I found it interesting that he commented that many of the less attractive women were nicer and more enjoyable to spend his time with. Some of the extremely beautiful ones would request "gifts" of expensive jewelry, etc. along with their regular payment. One reason for considering legalizing prostitution is to to attempt to limit the horrors many low-end prostitutes encounter in their lives (beatings by pimps and customers, drug addiction, disease, social rejection, etc.). The women of the Spitzer scandal echelon are more along the lines of the ancient Greek Hetaira prostitute class (well-educated sexual entertainers for the rich and powerful). A century from now I could see a true futuristic version of the Hetaira coming into being. http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_hetaira.htm Spike, the Spitzer scandal will probably cause more American young women to be sucked into prostitution when they realize how much "easy money" can be made from it. I see no end in sight for very expensive "high-end" prostitution (or low-end). But ask yourself, is it really "easy money?" Even for the high-end prostitutes where the odds of beatings, disease, etc. are reduced, there is still the matter of probable psychological damage where it may be hard for the women to later in life view men as anything other than a resource for money. When I was in college a visiting American professor gave a lecture on 90's era Russia (the nation was a mess back then). And she talked about how in a poll of Russian highschool girls that "prostitute" was the number one career choice! A number of female Russian exchange students in the audience took great offense to this (you can't blame them) but the professor explained she was only stating what was true. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Mon Mar 17 23:34:15 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:34:15 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Australian state public health system update In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 17/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > SURGEONS are quitting Victoria's public health > system in alarming numbers, dismayed at their > working conditions and pay, a ministerial review says. One problem is that specialists such as surgeons working in private are paid (ironically often by the same universal health insurance scheme) per procedure, while in public hospitals they are paid per session. The public/private discrepancy is smaller for non-procedural specialists, like most physicians. In the final analysis, public hospitals have to give their employees reasonable pay and conditions or lose them to the private system, interstate or overseas. -- Stathis Papaioannou From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Mar 18 00:23:33 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:23:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] money & harlotry References: <873617.21148.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004501c8888e$4ce9bf60$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Tom Nowell" To: Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:38 PM >> Olga wrote: >>Harlotry has *nothing* on many bona-fide wifeys. > And today, Paul McCartney's divorce sets a new UK record. See? What did I tell you? ... ;) Olga From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 18 00:26:04 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803162049w76843d5fjb6c861607ae2b0e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <116217.22417.qm@web65403.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> After looking at the avilable evidence, I would concur with Emlyn that this is indeed a genetic phenomenon. The PER3 (Period homolog 3) gene is a transcription factor and one of perhaps about a dozen highly conserved circadian rhythm genes. They were first discovered in drosophila (fruit flies) so these genes are very basal showing up very early in the evolutionary history of life. They are expressed in the retina and are associated with the photoreceptors there. With regard to Lee's question regarding the population genetics and equilibrium of the various alleles of PER3, the according to the Archer et. al. paper that Emlyn cited: "The Per3 polymorphism correlated significantly with extreme diurnal preference, the longer allele associating with morningness and the shorter allele with eveningness. The shorter allele was strongly associated with the delayed sleep phase syndrome patients, 75% of whom were homozygous." Now this is a fairly convincing demonstration that homozygousity of the shorter PER3 allele correlates with delayed sleep phase syndrome (DSPS). Now if one looks at prevelance studies for DSPS one finds that the prevalence is 0.17% and 0.13% in Norway and Japan respectively. This seems to demonstrate that night owls are a widespread phenomenon and there appears to be no linkage between DSPS and any particular ethnic group. This would suggest that there is a stable equilibrium at an average ~0.15% for extreme night owls and that the mutation arose well before the divergence of "racial" characteristics amongst humans. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10607071 http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1440-1819.1999.00533.x http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/content/full/130/6/1915#B13 Another curious observation about DSPS is that it is of much higher prevalence in teenagers than in adults, estimated at over 7% and skewed toward males. But the ratio of DSPS equalizes between sexes during adulthood. (Pelayo, R, Thorpy, MJ, Govinski, P Prevalence of delayed sleep phase syndrome among adolescents [abstract].Sleep Res 1988;17,392) So what do the above quoted numbers tell us about the population genetics of larks and nightowls? Well lets try to estimate the frequency of the short and long PER3 alleles that I will designate as O (for owl) and L (for lark). Now if we have homozygous owl individuals OO at 0.15% of the population. The assumption of Hardy Weinberg equilibrium (a gross simplification but still informative) would mean that LL^2 + 2LO + OO^2 = 1. This would entail that the overall frequency of the O allele is about sqrt(0.0015)=.0387 while the L allele would be at 1-.0387 or 0.9613 in the general population. So this is where it gets interesting. It is fairly well accepted that even a *fatal* recessive mutant allele will remain stable in a population over time as long as there is some selective benefit to being heterozygous for that mutation over being homozygous for the dominant allele. (c.f. sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis, etc.) If we calculate the frequency of heterozygotes for owlishness we have 2LO=0.0775 or about 7.75% of the population being heterozygotes. This is very close to the published prevalence of DSPS in adolescents. Going back to the "sneaky fucker" hypothesis, if these, heterozygotes got to mate earlier in life because their DSPS allowed them to engage in sex without getting trounced by the sleeping dominant males, it would explain why such a deleterious mutation would remain stable in the population. This also explains why the majority of adolescent DSPS cases are male, since they have most to gain by being sneaky fuckers. While this may seem to imply some sort of sex-linkage for PER3 which is *not* observed, it could easily be a case of incomplete penetrance or epistasis on the part of the female heterozygotes for PER3. In response Damien's concerns about insufficient cultural information regarding sleeping and sexual arrangements in our ancestors, I would surmise that variations in such a basal genetic system as circadian rhythm genes, would predate the evolutionary split between us and chimpanzees. Therefore the cultural details would be less relevant in this instance. Of course the only way to find out for sure is to look for nightowls among chimpanzees and find out if they are indeed sneaky fuckers. BTW, Stephano, you may may find this interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-24-hour_sleep-wake_syndrome On a more general note, I tend to object to calling what amounts to completely natural genetic variations syndromes, disorders, and diseases. From my point of view they are simply variants. If we lived underground, or in one of Spike's space ships, dwarfism would be the norm. If people had complete knowledge of themselves at the genetic level, I am certain that practically everyone would belong and identify with one genetic minority group or another, irrespective of the biological fallacy known as "race". Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 18 01:11:39 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:11:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803171518j29482e0ch8812af3de225820f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803180138.m2I1cIl9015261@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of John Grigg Subject: Re: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? Spike wrote: ... Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that harlotry could be this lucrative? >>>> I remember watching a cable news special report about prostitution and they discussed beautiful young American and European women who had "serviced" Saudi princes (an extreme example I admit) who would make 25 grand or more for a 24 hour period. But this was seen as giving a false impression to these girls that all such "high-end" prostitution could be so luxurious and rewarding...John Grigg John I am reminded of a story related by James Michener, who was a navy officer in the south Pacific in WW2. The Americans were based on a number of islands, many of which had plantations of various kinds, such a sugar cane. They had little contact with the outside world, so they didn't really have a good notion of inflation. So the plantation workers were still earning about a dollar a day for their labor by the early 1940s. Life was stable for decades. Then the war came along. The American boys naively assumed a hooker in these islands would command about the same price as they did in Toledo or St. Louis, so they offered them the usual 25 dollars, which established the going rate there. The sailors were offering a month's wages of a typical workman for an hour of services. Unlike the New York governor's hooker, these island women could line up a number of clients, for there were plenty of eager young men on the island with nowhere to spend their pay. Just try to imagine the disruption caused by that clash of civilizations. A busy young woman could earn more money in a month than her brothers and father could in their lifetimes. spike From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Mar 18 03:53:47 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:53:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices References: <1db0b2da0803170441p71d486a7ucf0140f2493b2c88@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00fe01c888ab$abeb0330$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Aleksei Riikonen" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:41 AM > Consider the high prices of some designer clothing and such. People being willing to pay those prices has nothing to do with the "objective quality" of the product. ("Objective quality" meaning, that if you gave the most expensive handbags or whatever to someone who didn't know they were that expensive, that person would be unable to distinguish a difference in quality between the very expensive product and some other, more reasonably priced products.) What Aleksei wrote above made me think of the following (I am no wine connoisseur, so cannot weigh in ...). Of course, there were only 20 subjects, perhaps with little wine knowledge, yet this article ...: seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/347350_wine15.html ... reminded me of this one I had read years ago: www.seattleweekly.com/news/0208/news-downey.php Don't you just love?: and la merde promptly hit le ventilateur. From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 18 04:52:08 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:52:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices In-Reply-To: <00cd01c887e4$4ba69240$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <200803180452.m2I4q8pI026222@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Gary Miller > Subject: Re: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices > > Spike asked: > > << Perhaps I was just three sigma na?ve (entirely possible.) > How many ExI-chat readers were aware before last week that > harlotry could be this lucrative? >> > > I seem to remember Heidi Fleiss getting about $1000 a night > for the girls she set up appointments for... OK so now Fox runs this headline: "Former Pimp Says Call Girl Behind Spitzer's Fall 'One of the Best Hookers Ever" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337928,00.html This gave me an idea. Prostitution is legal in Nevada. (Don't you love a state like that? Every country needs a Nevada.) We have American Idol (where celebrity judges intentionally insult and humiliate contestants), America's [supply an adjective]-est Home Videos, the various gross-out shows, Cops, Survivor, etc. Why not just have a game show competition to determine who is the best hooker ever? OK so we have a new reality show, where sponsors pay the hookers (generously) and accept applications from among billions of volunteers, who then partake of the contestant's wares, then make a commentary upon same, and rate each one. Come on America! We have not yet begun to explore the depths of bad taste in public entertainment. We have not yet viewed in prime time... Best Hooker Ever. spike From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 18 04:37:32 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <116217.22417.qm@web65403.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <321955.35909.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- The Avantguardian wrote: If > we > calculate the frequency of heterozygotes for owlishness we have > 2LO=0.0775 or about 7.75% of the population being heterozygotes. This > is very close to the published prevalence of DSPS in adolescents. FYI I made a slight error in the math by forgetting to multiply 2L by O for the frequency of the heterozygotes: 2LO=0.0745 or 7.45% which is even closer to 7%. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 05:43:34 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 00:43:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles Message-ID: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> http://shiriah.net/ayreon/Disc%201/07-Ayreon%20-%20Ride%20The%20Comet.mp3 Find your way home, little extremophiles Find your way home, donors of life You're on your own, little extremophiles You're on your own, cleaving the skies [Chorus]: Carry out our dangerous task Sail uncharted spheres Live out our dreams, ride the comet Journey on the Migrator trail Cross the new frontiers Pass on our genes, ride the comet ---------- On that note, any other scifi bands out there worth mentioning? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 08:30:23 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:30:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect References: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: <198d01c888d2$dd6d80f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> BillK writes > Currently No.5 in the New York Times Hardcover Nonfiction Best Seller List. > > See: > > Do you know why we still have a headache after taking a five-cent > aspirin, but why that same headache vanishes when the aspirin costs 50 > cents? I guess I understand. Although for many of us, we don't remember the price of the aspirins we take, and they work just as well whatever price we really paid. > Do you know why we sometimes find ourselves excitedly buying things we > don't really need? Sometimes I wonder just what part of Amazon's bottom line each year is due just to *my* own "excitedly buying things" I don't really need :-) > According to Ariely, our understanding of economics, now based on the > assumption of a rational subject, should, in fact, be based on our > systematic, unsurprising irrationality. Now isn't that going a bit far? For centuries and centuries, marketers have known that price means a whole lot, but that packaging, salesmanship, and other subtle effects also exist. Example: my grandfather ran a very small store. He kept it well lit and swept the floor because he really believed that it encouraged customers to buy more of his products, (e.g. re-visit the store). "Based on our systematic, unsurprising irrationality"? Surely a vast, vast overstatement. > Ariely argues that greater understanding of previously ignored or > misunderstood forces (emotions, relativity and social norms) that > influence our economic behavior brings a variety of opportunities > for reexamining individual motivation and consumer choice, as well > as economic and educational policy. Makes sense. Greater understanding is good---and there can always be higher profit as well as higher customer satisfaction obtaining as a result too. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 08:36:15 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:36:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Australian state public health system update References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <199001c888d3$9186d9b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stathis writes > Damien B wrote: > >> SURGEONS are quitting Victoria's public health >> system in alarming numbers, dismayed at their >> working conditions and pay, a ministerial review says. > > One problem is that specialists such as surgeons working in private > are paid (ironically often by the same universal health insurance > scheme) per procedure, while in public hospitals they are paid per > session. I see. > The public/private discrepancy is smaller for non-procedural > specialists, like most physicians. Hmm. > In the final analysis, public hospitals have to give their employees > reasonable pay and conditions or lose them to the private system, > interstate or overseas. But doesn't the tax payer already feel like he's *owed* treatment, and so if he goes private or offshore he'll essentially be paying twice over? That could discourage a lot of people, (except the very rich). By interstate, of course, you mean say from Queensland to Victoria, say. Now, in that case, does the tax-payer again feel as though he's paying twice? Or if you have an ailment and you live in Perth, can you get treatment in Sydney as easily as a resident of that latter city? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 09:10:51 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 02:10:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls References: <116217.22417.qm@web65403.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stuart writes > After looking at the available evidence, I would concur with Emlyn that > this is indeed a genetic phenomenon. The PER3 (Period homolog 3) gene > is a transcription factor and one of perhaps about a dozen highly > conserved circadian rhythm genes. They were first discovered in > drosophila (fruit flies) so these genes are very basal showing up very > early in the evolutionary history of life.... > > "The Per3 polymorphism correlated significantly with extreme diurnal > preference, the longer allele associating with morningness and the > shorter allele with eveningness. The shorter allele was strongly > associated with the delayed sleep phase syndrome patients, 75% of whom > were homozygous." > > Now this is a fairly convincing demonstration that homozygousity of the > shorter PER3 allele correlates with delayed sleep phase syndrome > (DSPS).Now if one looks at prevalence studies for DSPS one finds that > the prevalence is 0.17% and 0.13% in Norway and Japan respectively. > This seems to demonstrate that night owls are a widespread phenomenon > and there appears to be no linkage between DSPS and any particular > ethnic group. This would suggest that there is a stable equilibrium at > an average ~0.15% for extreme night owls and that the mutation arose > well before the divergence of "racial" characteristics amongst humans. What characteristics are you referring to? Race and therefore "racial characteristics" are a scientific fallacy, as surely you realize. > Another curious observation about DSPS is that it is of much higher > prevalence in teenagers than in adults, estimated at over 7% and skewed > toward males. But the ratio of DSPS equalizes between sexes during > adulthood. [Stuart's references omitted] All right, here is what I don't understand. If it's genetic---and evidently it is---then how does the greater opportunities for males to "strike" during their teenage years morph into more restraint later? Well, perhaps I'm only confused about how to describe all this. That is, in some small tightly-knit religious communities, the teenagers know that they dare not give in to any late night romancing because of the awful consequences of discovery. So it seems like cultural aspect ought to be involved too. Any simple words of wisdom to set me straight here? > epistasis on the part of the female heterozygotes for PER3. In response > Damien's concerns about insufficient cultural information regarding > sleeping and sexual arrangements in our ancestors, I would surmise that > variations in such a basal genetic system as circadian rhythm genes, > would predate the evolutionary split between us and chimpanzees. Sounds like a good hypothesis, but I'd be surprised if during the last 50,000 years some populations under different selection pressures ended up with identical distributions of this gene. For example, I'd predict that in Muslim countries where Sharia has been strongly enforced for centuries, (the Owl genes in your nicely worded explanation) might by now be on the decline. Historically, being OO could very well have lead to greater vulnerabilities at the hands of the authorities, and so resulted in a slight diminution of the numbers of offspring they (and perhaps even the OL and LO types) might have. > Therefore the cultural details would be less relevant in this instance. > Of course the only way to find out for sure is to look for nightowls > among chimpanzees and find out if they are indeed sneaky fuckers. Yes indeed. > On a more general note, I tend to object to calling what amounts to > completely natural genetic variations syndromes, disorders, and > diseases. From my point of view they are simply variants. If we lived > underground, or in one of Spike's space ships, dwarfism would be the > norm. Sounds very sensible to me. > If people had complete knowledge of themselves at the genetic > level, I am certain that practically everyone would belong and identify > with one genetic minority group or another, irrespective of the > biological fallacy known as "race". This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S. Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine actually reported an investigation of differences in the effectiveness of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. Lee From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 10:29:16 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:29:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect In-Reply-To: <198d01c888d2$dd6d80f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net> <198d01c888d2$dd6d80f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Now isn't that going a bit far? For centuries and centuries, marketers > have known that price means a whole lot, but that packaging, salesmanship, > and other subtle effects also exist. Example: my grandfather ran a very > small store. He kept it well lit and swept the floor because he really believed > that it encouraged customers to buy more of his products, (e.g. re-visit the > store). > > "Based on our systematic, unsurprising irrationality"? Surely a vast, > vast overstatement. > That's the book working! You wouldn't buy a book that said that *occasionally* people make mistakes when buying stuff, would you? :) Everybody knows that. But he is making a stronger claim than that, with experimental evidence to back it up. > > Makes sense. Greater understanding is good---and there can > always be higher profit as well as higher customer satisfaction > obtaining as a result too. > Yes, That politician was paying well over the odds for sexual services, but thought he was buying something really special, so probably felt he got his money's worth. Just like a 60,000 USD car is not twice as good as a 30,000 USD car. Probably better, in some respects, if you like the extra trimmings, but definitely not twice as good. One experiment showed that even if you didn't want any of the extra features, buyers still preferred it, because they thought they were getting more for their money. Even if they didn't want the extra junk! Reading the reviews and extracts provide more amusing examples. BillK From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 18 12:55:03 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:55:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Thoughts are real and not real. Message-ID: <8CA570E6A9BE459-11E4-3916@webmail-ne08.sysops.aol.com> Thoughts are like dreams, hopes and wishes. They are products/effects of reality/genes. The latter{genes} are tested to exist in organic forms of nature but do not exist in inorganic forms or minerals, atoms and subatomic particles. So how far removed are thoughts from reality? Genes=brains=molecules=chemicals/minerals=electrochemical changes=feelings and thoughts. All those processes can be scientifically tested so is it safe to say that there is no separation between thoughts and reality? When we see the outward manifestations of thought like in print or in speech as seen and heard the reader or the listener may or may not believe the substance/truth behind the printed word or the sound of speech but the fact of it being recorded becomes true as spoken or printed. On the other hand, there is a degree of difference between thoughts and acts arising from the observer/doer and the observed/thought. Terry From stathisp at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 13:10:07 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:10:07 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Australian state public health system update In-Reply-To: <199001c888d3$9186d9b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> <199001c888d3$9186d9b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 18/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > > In the final analysis, public hospitals have to give their employees > > reasonable pay and conditions or lose them to the private system, > > interstate or overseas. > > > But doesn't the tax payer already feel like he's *owed* treatment, > and so if he goes private or offshore he'll essentially be paying twice > over? That could discourage a lot of people, (except the very rich). No, I was actually talking about hospital *employees*. Public hospitals try to entice doctors and nurses to work for them with promises of better pay and conditions. There is a constant pressure from management (who, now that Victorian public hospitals are "corporatised", earn ten times as much as the people who do the actual work, in keeping with private enterprise tradition) to improve various outcomes such as number of patients treated, complication rates, readmission rates, waiting times for elective procedures, and so on, while keeping to a budget. Gathering these statistics is a pain in the neck for clinicians who are interested only in the welfare of the particular patients they are looking after, not some theoretical model of cost/benefit analysis. Pushed too hard, either staff leave and go elsewhere, or outcome measures slip, or both. This creates pressure for budget increases to hire more staff, buy more equipment, build new hospitals. All patients do have the option of going to their publicly funded, private doctor rather than the public hospitals, but for inpatient treatment they need private health insurance (or a lot of cash) if they want to go to a private hospital. High income earners save on the portion of their taxes used for public health funding if they take out private health insurance, the idea being to take some of the strain off the public health system. However, many people pay for private health insurance for the tax benefits and *still* choose to use the public hospitals, or are advised to go public by their doctors due to the complicated nature of their condition. Equality of access is only one advantage of a publicly funded health care system. The other advantage is economic efficiency. Health outcomes in Australia are about comparable to those in the US, but the US spends about 50% more for its health care as a proportion of GDP than other OECD countries. In fact, even *government* spending on health care in the US is higher than government spending in other countries with a universal health care system. -- Stathis Papaioannou From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 14:05:07 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:05:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Eliot Spitzer and the Price-Placebo Effect References: <1205765886_1350@S4.cableone.net><198d01c888d2$dd6d80f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <19a001c88901$1fdfc370$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> BillK writes (hey, okay if I call you "Bill" from now on, or do you prefer it this way?) > Lee wrote: > >> Now isn't that going a bit far? For centuries and centuries, marketers >> have known that price means a whole lot, but that packaging, salesmanship, >> and other subtle effects also exist. Example... >> >> "Based on our systematic, unsurprising irrationality"? Surely a vast, >> vast overstatement. > > That's the book working! Not sure what that means, but don't answer if it's being explained by your next words: > You wouldn't buy a book that said that *occasionally* people make > mistakes when buying stuff, would you? Well, my book group might very well do that. But they are quite the refined, careful, studious, skeptical, hideously rational gang. I might buy such a book---but I do understand if you are saying that blurbs have to exaggerate. Perhaps you should have mentioned that you too found the claims a bit of an exaggeration, and avoided my complaining :-) > :) Everybody knows that. But he is making a stronger claim > than that, with experimental evidence to back it up. Based on your reputation here, Bill, I entirely believe you. >> Makes sense. Greater understanding is good---and there can >> always be higher profit as well as higher customer satisfaction >> obtaining as a result too. > > Yes, That politician was paying well over the odds for sexual > services, but thought he was buying something really special, so > probably felt he got his money's worth. > > Just like a 60,000 USD car is not twice as good as a 30,000 USD car. > Probably better, in some respects, if you like the extra trimmings, > but definitely not twice as good. Well, BUT! But the rich types are known to behave as though money were not a factor. Again, I hate to be spouting what "everyone knows", but for some few things, money is not a factor even for me. I paid almost a hundred dollars the other day for an old, old, thin out-of-print SF book (The Horror >From the Hills) whose language totally captivated me (and whose language even today I find hilarious). I lent to to a friend back when I was 22 and that was the last I ever saw of it. Later, I couldn't even remember the name. Finally when our ever growing web finally yielded to my search on phrases, I *had* to have it. > One experiment showed that even if you didn't want any of the extra > features, buyers still preferred it, because they thought they were > getting more for their money. Even if they didn't want the extra junk! Yeah, that's believable. Though I'd like a study done that indicated what proportion of the populace was really susceptible to this, or I dunno, a histogram or something.... The people I know watch their dollars very carefully. > Reading the reviews and extracts provide more amusing examples. I'll check out the reviews at Amazon. Any other place I should look? Thanks, Lee P.S. This is hardly about "Eliot Spitzer" any more, but I don't think I'll have too much more to say about this, so I guess I'll just go along with the general preference here alas, , and hook in those poor unsuspecting readers who want something about Eliot's case or something directly relevant. From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 18 14:43:14 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:43:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: "Problems of AI" Message-ID: <8CA571D87984C9F-B78-5622@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> >From Wikipedia: "Problems of AI While there is no universally accepted definition of intelligence,[52] AI researchers have studied several traits that are considered essential.[6] [edit]Deduction, reasoning, problem solving Early AI researchers developed algorithms that imitated the process of conscious, step-by-step reasoning that human beings use when they solve puzzles, play board games, or make logical deductions.[53] By the late 80s and 90s, AI research had also developed highly successful methods for dealing with uncertain or incomplete information, employing concepts from probability and economics.[54] For difficult problems, most of these algorithms can require enormous computational resources ? most experience a "combinatorial explosion": the amount of memory or computer time required becomes astronomical when the problem goes beyond a certain size. The search for more efficient problem solving algorithms is a high priority for AI research.[55] It is not clear, however, that conscious human reasoning is any more efficient when faced with a difficult abstract problem. Cognitive scientists have demonstrated that human beings solve most of their problems using unconscious reasoning, rather than the conscious, step-by-step deduction that early AI research was able to model.[56] Embodied cognitive science argues that unconscious sensorimotor skills are essential to our problem solving abilities. It is hoped that sub-symbolic methods, like computational intelligence and situated AI, will be able to model these instinctive skills. The problem of unconscious problem solving, which forms part of our commonsense reasoning, is largely unsolved." ___________________ In other words, how does a living brain stores memories? A computer is not living system but a device to access stored and to store information. The structure of a living brain and a computer both use energy. So I don't see any difference in the subatomic level. The problem is how to discover the process of integrating the micro world of the subconscious with the macro state of consciousness? Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 14:57:06 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:57:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <200803180138.m2I1cIl9015261@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803171518j29482e0ch8812af3de225820f@mail.gmail.com> <200803180138.m2I1cIl9015261@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803180757w6f78e9f8h71223197e050fc7c@mail.gmail.com> Olga wrote: Don't forget that even these days ... there are still far too many women who marry for money (whether they like to acknowledge this to themselves or not). Don't get me started on this subject :). Harlotry has *nothing* on many bona-fide wifeys. >>> I'm impressed and suprised that a women today would still acknowledge this fact (I used to date a woman who fiercely argued that this was no longer true). I'd be very interested to get you started on this topic! : ) The whole concept of "social currency" in mate selection totally fascinates me. I think a male with lots of resources/money can be very tempting marriage material even when the woman in her heart of hearts knows she is not in love with him. But then we could get into a discussion of what love/falling in love truly is and what causes it. I find it interesting how reaching the "falling in love" critical mass can be very similar and yet different for every person. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 15:36:36 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:36:36 +0000 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803180757w6f78e9f8h71223197e050fc7c@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803171518j29482e0ch8812af3de225820f@mail.gmail.com> <200803180138.m2I1cIl9015261@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803180757w6f78e9f8h71223197e050fc7c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 2:57 PM, John Grigg wrote: > I'm impressed and suprised that a women today would still acknowledge this > fact (I used to date a woman who fiercely argued that this was no longer > true). I'd be very interested to get you started on this topic! : ) The > whole concept of "social currency" in mate selection totally fascinates me. > I think a male with lots of resources/money can be very tempting marriage > material even when the woman in her heart of hearts knows she is not in love > with him. But then we could get into a discussion of what love/falling in > love truly is and what causes it. I find it interesting how reaching the > "falling in love" critical mass can be very similar and yet different for > every person. > 'Marrying for money' means many different things to different people. And the meaning changes over the years and in different societies. So, any discussion is probably headed straight into confusion. Among the rich, marriage used to be a way of combining dynasties and keeping the wealth within the family. Also it used to be the case that in order to enjoy the benefits of 'marrying money', then the partners had to remain married. It is a relatively recent legal innovation in western society that (usually) women can make a business plan out of marriage and divorce within a few years to cash in their winnings. As usual it is the middle classes who end up worst off. Paul McCartney is so rich that he won't miss the 50 million USD that he has to pay his ex-wife. But in middle class divorce there is often not enough money to support two separate families, so both partners become much poorer. BillK From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 15:44:57 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:44:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Australian state public health system update References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080316155749.02473b40@satx.rr.com> <199001c888d3$9186d9b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <19a901c8890f$63864dc0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stathis writes >> But doesn't the tax payer already feel like he's *owed* treatment, >> and so if he goes private or offshore he'll essentially be paying twice >> over? That could discourage a lot of people, (except the very rich). > > No, I was actually talking about hospital *employees*. Oops. Duh. Sorry. > Public hospitals try to entice doctors and nurses to work for them with > promises of better pay and conditions. > > There is a constant pressure from management (who, now that Victorian > public hospitals are "corporatised", earn ten times as much as the > people who do the actual work, in keeping with private enterprise > tradition) to improve various outcomes... > Pushed too hard, either staff leave and go elsewhere, or outcome > measures slip, or both. This creates pressure for budget increases to > hire more staff, buy more equipment, build new hospitals. > > All patients do have the option of going to their publicly funded, > private doctor rather than the public hospitals, but for inpatient > treatment they need private health insurance (or a lot of cash) if > they want to go to a private hospital. Saths what I thed. > Equality of access is only one advantage of a publicly funded health > care system. The other advantage is economic efficiency. Health > outcomes in Australia are about comparable to those in the US, but the > US spends about 50% more for its health care as a proportion of GDP > than other OECD countries. In fact, even *government* spending on > health care in the US is higher than government spending in other > countries with a universal health care system. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard you and Rafal go around on this, and even some neutral bystander IIRC said that the country's situations, citizens, health care provided, etc., weren't really comparable. Lee From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 18 16:09:44 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:09:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Psychological decoherence/stress Message-ID: <8CA57299D7DDBBD-B78-5D06@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> On my previews post, the last sentence read: "On the other hand, there is a degree of difference between thoughts and acts arising from the observer/doer and the observed/thought." Psychological stress is the degree of difference arising from the separation of the observer/doer and thought/judgement. In the Spritzer case, society judge his conduct as immoral, a subjective thought subject to change. In some society, prostitution is either moral or immoral. A case in point, between married couples, a wife or husband who married for money maybe considered normal/moral but when you think the same couple's intent, it is the same as a prostitute's goal [ a business transaction}. Under the US law a marriage is legal but during the time of the marriage when one of the couple forces his/her partner for sex causing physical and psychological stress/harm, the law considers it rape, an act which can be prosecuted and punished accordingly. Therefore, judgemental acts are not universal truths. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 18 16:49:08 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:49:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Another psychological decoherence/stress Message-ID: <8CA572F1E415761-B78-6007@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> The Dalai Lama was quoted as saying that words like theist or atheist does not matter. What matter is sincerety, forgiveness and compassion." I agree with the Dalai Lama in that theist and atheist or whatever are only words. But how do you know who is sincere and compassionate? The Dalai Lama maybe sincere in forgiving the Chinese but how does he show sincerety by stepping down from his position as leader of the Tibetan people? In the news today, he is quoted as saying that he would step down to stop the violence in Llhasa where Tibetan monks are rebelling against the Chinese rule. The Chinese leaders claimed the Tibetans who want independence from China are causing the rebellion to get the world's attention so as to boycott the coming Olympics to be held in China. The question is why would HHDL thinks his stepping down as a leader would stop the rebellion when he only represent a subset of Buddhist schools among many in Tibet? The rest of the schools look up to him as a symbol of peace having won the Nobel Peace Price sometime in mid-eighties. My guess is he has to live up to the title, if so then there is no sincerety in his forgiveness and compassion. A lie is a lie whether white or gray or whatever hue in between. Terry Terry From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Mar 18 19:05:07 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:05:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" > Olga, I see Wright is in the headline news for the third day. Future > historians may see the Wright material coming into the public awareness as > the beginning of the end of Obama's presidential hopes. Not so fast, fella! (Was this a great speech, or what?): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/us/politics/18text-obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin :) Olga From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 21:33:14 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:33:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Ticketmaster/scalpers Message-ID: <2d6187670803181433j4e4b0940o5482e28e4f56a70b@mail.gmail.com> I much belatedly tried today to buy concert tickets online (never had attempted this before) for a Bon Jovi performance a month from now (just got announced in the paper), only to learn I had a snowball's chance in Hell of getting two decent seats next to each other. A big reason for this of course is not just scalpers, but online scalpers! They buy up tickets and then turn around and on the actual Ticketmaster website make an unholy profit off them in the "sell your tickets" section. LOL I had a friend tell me that to get two good upfront seats I would need to be online with credit card number at the ready during the first five minutes of the tickets being available for sale! After that initial feeding frenzy you are basically out of luck (unless you are willing to spend several thousand dollars for really good seats that are next to each other). I'm surprised there are not laws limiting scalper resale mark-ups (especially online at the Ticketmaster website). And I'm curious to know the views of list-members as to how you view this dance of supply and demand. Am I being anti-Libertarian and anti-Extropian by feeling the way I do? I never knew a "take a date to the concert" could be so potentially expensive! But they still do have fairly inexpensive tickets available where we get to sit close to the *rear* of the band (literally behind the stage!). I'm not sure if she would like that. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 18 21:45:00 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:45:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com> Sir Arthur Clarke has died at the age of 90. From amara at amara.com Tue Mar 18 22:04:33 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:04:33 -0600 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices was RE: Feel Safer Now? Message-ID: BillK pharos at gmail.com : >It is a relatively recent legal innovation in western society that >(usually) women can make a business plan out of marriage and divorce >within a few years to cash in their winnings. Why do you automatically assume that it must be a woman looking for a rich husband? Some counter examples (more common that you might think) http://rome.craigslist.it/m4w/608440435.html http://rome.craigslist.it/m4w/591770796.html Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 18 22:25:43 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:25:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary psychology Message-ID: <8CA575E23A83C1D-1090-DCE@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> ""> If people had complete knowledge of themselves at the genetic > level, I am certain that practically everyone would belong and identify > with one genetic minority group or another, irrespective of the > biological fallacy known as "race". This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S. Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine actually reported an investigation of differences in the effectiveness of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. Lee ____________ I'd like to know how nitric-oxide insufficiency contribute to more hypertension among the black than among the white race. Skin color of course is genetically determined but since we all came from Africa, those who went to Asia and Europe developed lighter skin over time depending on the amount of time spent exposed to the sun's rays. I don't know about any hypertensive medicine's effectiveness being affected by nitric-oxide insufficiency. Its interesting to know what the pharmaceutical name or chemical name of the drug for anyone who work with the medical industry. Evolutionary psychology is an applied science so its related to chemistry. The pharmaceutical company make generic medicine for less cost. Is it possible that the cheaper drug is offered to those who can't afford the expensive drug? As far as I know the effect of medicine is the same irrespective of cost. On another note, prescribing the drug should not be based on race but on age, weight and some other medical complications. Terry From russell.rukin at lineone.net Tue Mar 18 22:24:20 2008 From: russell.rukin at lineone.net (russell.rukin at lineone.net) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:24:20 +0100 (GMT+01:00) Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> Even though I was firmly in the Asimov camp I was saddened to see this in my inbox. Hopefully we'll all get to ride the space elevator in time... Russell R >----Original Message---- >From: thespike at satx.rr.com >Date: 18/03/2008 21:45 >To: "ExI chat list", >Subj: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies > >Sir Arthur Clarke has died at the age of 90. > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > __________________________________________________ Find the answer to your questions - www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/ From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 22:51:44 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:51:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke has passed on Message-ID: <200803181751.44323.kanzure@gmail.com> http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article3579120.ece Science fiction writer Sir Arthur C Clarke has died aged 90 in his adopted home of Sri Lanka, it was confirmed tonight. Clarke, who had battled debilitating post-polio syndrome since the 1960s and sometimes used a wheelchair, died at 1:30 a.m. after suffering breathing problems, aide Rohan De Silva said. The visionary author of over 100 books, who predicted the existence of satellites, was most famous for his short story "The Sentinel," which was expanded into the novel on which Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" was based. He was also credited with inventing the concept of communications satellites in 1945, decades before they became a reality. Clarke was the last surviving member of what was sometimes known as the "Big Three" of science fiction alongside Robert A. Heinlein and Isaac Asimov. The son of an English farming family, Clarke was born in the seaside town of Minehead, Somerset, England on December 16, 1917. After attending schools in his home county, Arthur Clarke moved to London in 1936 and pursued his early interest in space sciences by joining the British Interplanetary Society. He started to contribute to the BIS Bulletin and began to write science fiction. With the onset of World War II he joined the RAF, eventually becoming an officer in charge of the first radar talk-down equipment, the Ground Controlled Approach, during its experimental trials. Later, his only non-science-fiction novel, Glide Path, was based on this work. In 1945, a UK periodical magazine ?Wireless World? published his landmark technical paper "Extra-terrestrial Relays" in which he first set out the principles of satellite communication with satellites in geostationary orbits - a speculation realised 25 years later. During the evolution of his discovery, he worked with scientists and engineers in the USA in the development of spacecraft and launch systems, and addressed the United Nations during their deliberations on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Today, the geostationary orbit at 36,000 kilometres above the Equator is named The Clarke Orbit by the International Astronomical Union. Despite his vast contribution Clarke still is best known as a visionary science fiction writer. The first story he sold professionally was "Rescue Party", written in March 1945 and appearing in Astounding Science in May 1946. He went on to become a prolific writer of science fiction, renowned worldwide. In 1964, he started to work with the noted film producer Stanley Kubrick on a science fiction movie script. Four years later, he shared an Oscar nomination with Kubrick at the Hollywood Academy Awards for the film version of ?2001: A Space Odyssey?. In television, Clarke worked alongside Walter Cronkite and Wally Schirra for the CBS coverage of the Apollo 12 and 15 space missions. His thirteen-part TV series Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World in 1981 and Arthur C. Clarke's World of strange Powers in 1984 have been screened in many countries and he has contributed to other TV series about space, such as Walter Cronkite's Universe series in 1981. Clarke first visited Colombo, Sri Lanka (then called Ceylon) in December 1954 and has lived there since 1956 , pursuing an enthusiasm for underwater exploration along that coast and on the Great Barrier Reef. In 1998, his lifetime work was recognised when he was honoured with a Knighthood ? formally conferred by Prince Charles in Sri Lanka two years later. In recent years, he has been largely confined to a wheelchair due to post-polio syndrome, but his output as a writer continued undiminished. ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 18 22:42:58 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:42:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary Psychology: Larks vs Night Owls In-Reply-To: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <205017.24915.qm@web65401.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Lee Corbin wrote: > All right, here is what I don't understand. If it's genetic---and > evidently > it is---then how does the greater opportunities for males to "strike" > during their teenage years morph into more restraint later? Assuming you are asking for a genetic explanation rather than a psychological or cultural one, for the heterozygotes it could be that the O and L alleles are differently expressed at different stages of life. Teens could express the one allele more while adults might express the other more. Also I am not generally a believer in genetic determinism. Conscious effort and social conditioning can overcome genetic propensity, especially with regard to behavioral traits. Otherwise, for example, all men would cheat on their wives all the time. Well, > perhaps I'm only confused about how to describe all this. That is, > in some small tightly-knit religious communities, the teenagers know > that > they dare not give in to any late night romancing because of the > awful > consequences of discovery. So it seems like cultural aspect ought to > be involved too. Any simple words of wisdom to set me straight here? I am not saying cultural aspects don't matter. I am just saying that it could have been a pre-existing condition that came about before cultural factors came into play. I mean that is a recurrent theme in EP is it not? That genetic traits that evolved over millions of year to adapt us to hunting and gathering are not necessarily adaptive to modern society? > Sounds like a good hypothesis, but I'd be surprised if during the > last 50,000 years some populations under different selection > pressures ended up with identical distributions of this gene. For > example, I'd predict that in Muslim countries where Sharia has > been strongly enforced for centuries, (the Owl genes in your nicely > worded explanation) might by now be on the decline. Historically, > being OO could very well have lead to greater vulnerabilities > at the hands of the authorities, and so resulted in a slight > diminution > of the numbers of offspring they (and perhaps even the OL and LO > types) might have. Well there probably are variations of the allele frequencies amongst various cultures due to varying degrees of social selection for or against the trait. I was simply trying to explain what seemed to be a relatively stable ratio of owls to larks in such disparate cultures as Norwegians and Japanese. Also keep in mind that I was assuming the existence of an equilibrium to begin with and that enabled the math to work out correctly as if owlishness was a simple Mendellian trait. I was more surprised than anything else. I don't have enough data on the subject to give you a reliable P-value so it could just be a coincidence. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 18 23:19:00 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:19:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> Message-ID: <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 18 March 2008, russell.rukin at lineone.net wrote: > Even though I was firmly in the Asimov camp I was saddened to see > this in my inbox. Hopefully we'll all get to ride the space elevator > in time... Huh. That hasn't hit my inbox yet. I am trying to figure out why Clarke didn't do cryonics. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 23:21:55 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:21:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary psychology References: <8CA575E23A83C1D-1090-DCE@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <19c201c8894f$3542a180$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Sorry---this post isn't really about Armchair EP. I'm mad and I'm just firing this off. Terry writes, literally as follows: > ""> If people had complete knowledge of themselves at the genetic >> level, I am certain that practically everyone would belong and > identify >> with one genetic minority group or another, irrespective of the >> biological fallacy known as "race". > > This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume > that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining > Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S.... And you know, I could have sworn that it was I who wrote that post! There was no attribution at the top of the post whatsoever. Terry just read the email, clicked on reply, and began pecking away, and then clicked on send. (Well, I now see that he did at least snip quite a bit of what the Avantguardian and I had to say. It could have been far worse.) Just what do people think by taking so little effort on their posts and breaking so many conventions? Do they really believe that anyone is going to keep on reading them? Sorry, but I've had to give up on Terry's posts the last week or so, for this and other reasons. What happened to the Terry who was on this list several years ago and had a lot of good stuff? Lee P.S. Here is the rest of his post, mainly so that you can see that fortunately my name did appear at the end of *my* spiel, before I quite got angry and started to protest the plagiarism :-) _________________________________________________ [Lee wrote, continuing from the above] > Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as > though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different > "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. > > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine > actually reported an investigation of differences in the effectiveness > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) > > Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. > > Lee > ____________ > [Terry wrote] > I'd like to know how nitric-oxide insufficiency contribute to more > hypertension among the black than among the white race. > Skin color of course is genetically determined but since we all came > from Africa, those who went to Asia and Europe developed lighter skin > over time depending on the amount of time spent exposed to the sun's > rays. > > I don't know about any hypertensive medicine's effectiveness being > affected by nitric-oxide insufficiency. Its interesting to know what > the pharmaceutical name or chemical name of the drug for anyone who > work with the medical industry. > > Evolutionary psychology is an applied science so its related to > chemistry. The pharmaceutical company make generic medicine for less > cost. Is it possible that the cheaper drug is offered to those who > can't afford the expensive drug? As far as I know the effect of > medicine is the same irrespective of cost. > > On another note, prescribing the drug should not be based on race but > on age, weight and some other medical complications. > > Terry From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 18 23:41:50 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:41:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Armchair Evolutionary psychology References: <8CA575E23A83C1D-1090-DCE@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <19d401c88952$043b7c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I've calmed down now---and maybe my conscience was beginning to bug me. Terry wrote > [Lee wrote] > > Stuart our Avantguardian wrote > > > If people had complete knowledge of themselves at the genetic > > > level, I am certain that practically everyone would belong and > > > identify with one genetic minority group or another, > > > irrespective of the biological fallacy known as "race". > > > > This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume > > that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining > > Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S. > > Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as > > though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different > > "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. > > > > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine > > actually reported an investigation of differences in the effectiveness > > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" > > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't > > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge > > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) > > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people > > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- > > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) > > > > Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. > > I'd like to know how nitric-oxide insufficiency contribute to more > hypertension among the black than among the white race. I'm not sure where you could get that information. It would be interesting, of course. Maybe there is some on-line, but it would probably be tied up in that stupid JSTOR stuff, and inaccessible to the common surfer. > Skin color of course is genetically determined but since we all came > from Africa, those who went to Asia and Europe developed lighter skin > over time depending on the amount of time spent exposed to the sun's > rays. Well, how about that! I had thought that the sons of Ham were just colored that way by the Big Man upstairs. > I don't know about any hypertensive medicine's effectiveness being > affected by nitric-oxide insufficiency. It's interesting to know what > the pharmaceutical name or chemical name of the drug, for anyone > who works with the medical industry. I'll see if my book mentioned anything more. > Evolutionary psychology is an applied science so its related to > chemistry. The pharmaceutical company make generic medicine for less > cost. Is it possible that the cheaper drug is offered to those who > can't afford the expensive drug? Evidently that is *not* the explanation at all. Or else the NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine) has reached an all time low in their authoritativeness. > On another note, prescribing the drug should not be based on race but > on age, weight and some other medical complications. No. Prescribing what drug to be used should not be based on what you or I think would be important, or politically correct, or according to common sense. It should be based *solely* on what is best for the particular patient, and according to the latest unbiased medical evidence. Lee From sentience at pobox.com Tue Mar 18 23:48:32 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:48:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47E054D0.9020201@pobox.com> Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Tuesday 18 March 2008, russell.rukin at lineone.net wrote: >> Even though I was firmly in the Asimov camp I was saddened to see >> this in my inbox. Hopefully we'll all get to ride the space elevator >> in time... > > Huh. That hasn't hit my inbox yet. I am trying to figure out why Clarke > didn't do cryonics. The following is a public service announcement: PLEASE STOP DYING -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 00:07:08 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:07:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Please stop dying (was: Re: Arthur C. Clarke dies) In-Reply-To: <47E054D0.9020201@pobox.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <47E054D0.9020201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200803181907.08874.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > The following is a public service announcement: > ????????PLEASE STOP DYING Let's go grave digging. Seriously. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From pjmanney at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 00:18:59 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:18:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices In-Reply-To: <200803180452.m2I4q8pI026222@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <00cd01c887e4$4ba69240$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <200803180452.m2I4q8pI026222@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803181718p4a6fbb2dw9c73baa5069500b6@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:52 PM, spike wrote: > This gave me an idea. Prostitution is legal in Nevada. (Don't you love a > state like that? Every country needs a Nevada.) We have American Idol > (where celebrity judges intentionally insult and humiliate contestants), > America's [supply an adjective]-est Home Videos, the various gross-out > shows, Cops, Survivor, etc. Why not just have a game show competition to > determine who is the best hooker ever? OK so we have a new reality show, > where sponsors pay the hookers (generously) and accept applications from > among billions of volunteers, who then partake of the contestant's wares, > then make a commentary upon same, and rate each one. > > Come on America! We have not yet begun to explore the depths of bad taste > in public entertainment. We have not yet viewed in prime time... Best > Hooker Ever. You need to watch more TV, Spike. First, there was "Temptation Island", where the pros... I mean, contestants... did everything but have a pimp. Unless you consider the producers the pimps... I certainly did. Then there were the supposed reality-docos, "Cathouse" and "Pleasure for Sale" on HBO. There's "Rock of Love" where the skankiest women on TV compete to be rocker Bret Michael's girlfriend. He must testdrive each of them, of course... They do everything except... well, there's no difference really, except this supposed family show has a prohibition against filmed penetration and full nudity. Lucky us. Someone attempted to make a show called "Virgin Territory" where the winning male virgin would sleep with Jemma Jameson or Paris Hilton. The question there is, who's the prostitute? Now, someone is trying to make "Who Wants to Marry a US Citizen?": http://www.tvsquad.com/2007/12/01/new-reality-show-who-wants-to-marry-a-u-s-citizen/ I suspect the qualifications won't just be cooking and conversation. And really, who needs TV? Just get on the Internet. Craigslist, in particular, where you can get -- and comment on -- the real thing. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez16mar16,1,5391421,print.column Bread and circuses, my friends... bread and circuses. PJ From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 19 00:24:14 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:24:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> At 06:19 PM 3/18/2008 -0500, BB wrote: >I am trying to figure out why Clarke >didn't do cryonics. He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were dead, and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. He was tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. Damien Broderick From pjmanney at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 00:46:03 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:46:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles In-Reply-To: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803181746g5d27a351u91666584710c86a8@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On that note, any other scifi bands out there worth mentioning? Where do you start and how far back do you want to go? I could argue Sinatra singing "Fly Me to the Moon" could qualify. In no particular order, with an H+ bias and off the top of my head: The Flaming Lips Radiohead David Bowie Bjork/Sugarcubes Paul Kantner/Jefferson Airplane/Starship Thomas Dolby Cursor Minor Red Harvest Hawkwind Papa Roach Vesania Cyanotic Voivod Fantomas Mr. Bungle I'm know I'm forgetting a lot and probably don't know even more. If you include the topic of psychedelia (not the musical genre, but mind-altering as an H+ subject), the list is endless. PJ From fauxever at sprynet.com Wed Mar 19 00:46:17 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:46:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys><200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001601c8895a$a4c31750$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:24 PM > He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were dead, > and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. He was > tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. Video: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.wired.com/underwire/images/2007/12/14/250pxarthur_c_clarke_20050909_2.png&imgrefurl=http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2007/12/index.html&h=381&w=300&sz=184&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=AuAUJ_06OKHSXM:&tbnh=123&tbnw=97&prev=/images%3Fq%3Darthur%2Bc%2Bclarke%2Bwiki%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN Olga From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Wed Mar 19 00:37:17 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Please stop dying (was: Re: Arthur C. Clarke dies) In-Reply-To: <200803181907.08874.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <959699.33309.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Bryan Bishop wrote: On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > The following is a public service announcement: > PLEASE STOP DYING Let's go grave digging. Seriously. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ Or someone could try making it illegal, like a mayor in France did recently: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL0552076620080305 - Anne --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Wed Mar 19 01:07:00 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:07:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: <004501c8895d$89a847d0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Sorry, better site addresss: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qLdeEjdbWE ----- Original Message ----- From: "Olga Bourlin" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:46 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies > From: "Damien Broderick" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:24 PM > >> He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were dead, >> and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. He was >> tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. > > Video: > > http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.wired.com/underwire/images/2007/12/14/250pxarthur_c_clarke_20050909_2.png&imgrefurl=http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2007/12/index.html&h=381&w=300&sz=184&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=AuAUJ_06OKHSXM:&tbnh=123&tbnw=97&prev=/images%3Fq%3Darthur%2Bc%2Bclarke%2Bwiki%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN > > Olga From sentience at pobox.com Wed Mar 19 01:12:53 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:12:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 06:19 PM 3/18/2008 -0500, BB wrote: > >> I am trying to figure out why Clarke >> didn't do cryonics. > > He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were dead, > and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. He was > tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. Give me a god-damned break. I suppose *he* didn't have any friends who might be sad when he was gone? Like half the science-fiction community? You've got to draw a line in time, somewhere. He didn't want to visit the Moon someday? And why didn't he have CI freeze his dog, if he cared that much? From a recent AGI conference: Person: "Oh, I've often thought about signing up for cryonics, but I haven't gotten around to it yet." Me: "If you have an accident before you get around to it, it will be death by stupidity." Person (pauses): "Good point." I think that as long as not signing up for cryonics for stupid reasons remains socially acceptable, people are going to go on not signing up for cryonics for stupid reasons. Only when they realize that everyone else is going to look at them like they're an idiot, will it occur to them that they might be doing something idiotic. What we need around here is more peer pressure. Friends don't let friends die. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From max at maxmore.com Wed Mar 19 01:03:26 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:03:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20080319010328.KKQU25381.hrndva-omta03.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> At 07:24 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote: >At 06:19 PM 3/18/2008 -0500, BB wrote: > > >I am trying to figure out why Clarke > >didn't do cryonics. > >He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were dead, >and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. He was >tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. > >Damien Broderick Clarke's response is a terribly self-centered one, then. By extension of his own reasoning, he is giving all those who hold him dear additional reason to accept their own death. The above is, of course, an unpleasantly cold way of putting it. Truly, I don't hold Clarke's decision against him (much). Still, it's worth pointing out the cold underlying reality of his thinking. Also, based on what I've seen quoted from him in the past, I believe he clung to certain personal identity-based objections to cryonics. When a real visionary like ACC passively and consciously accepts the permanent extinction of natural death, I can't but help find it a bit depressing. Max Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Mar 19 01:36:20 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:36:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803181746g5d27a351u91666584710c86a8@mail.gmail.com> References: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> <29666bf30803181746g5d27a351u91666584710c86a8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01df01c88961$a38255c0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On that note, any other scifi bands out there worth mentioning? And my personal favorites... Neil Young "Sample and Hold" and "Transformer Man" from his synthesizer phase Styx Mr. Roboto Heavy Metal Movie Soundtrack Edgar Winter "Frankenstein" Alan Parson's Project "I Robot" Album Beastie Boy "Intergalactic" Pink Floyd "Shine on you Crazy Diamond" and "Welcome to the Machine" where man meets AGI Billy Thorpe "Children of the Sun" Blue Oyster Cult "Godzilla" From pjmanney at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 02:16:25 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:16:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles In-Reply-To: <01df01c88961$a38255c0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> <29666bf30803181746g5d27a351u91666584710c86a8@mail.gmail.com> <01df01c88961$a38255c0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <29666bf30803181916n167ae600l849c626558abff3a@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > Neil Young "Sample and Hold" and "Transformer Man" from his synthesizer > phase > Styx Mr. Roboto > Heavy Metal Movie Soundtrack > Edgar Winter "Frankenstein" > Alan Parson's Project "I Robot" Album > Beastie Boy "Intergalactic" > Pink Floyd "Shine on you Crazy Diamond" and "Welcome to the Machine" where > man meets AGI > Billy Thorpe "Children of the Sun" > Blue Oyster Cult "Godzilla" Good list. If we're going for individual songs and stretching the theme, some more thoughts: Yes -- Machine Messiah and Tempus Fugit Donald Fagan -- I.G.Y. Frank Zappa -- Sy Borg U2 - Miracle Drug Paul Simon -- Boy in the Bubble Our Lady Peace -- In Repair (and that Kurzweil song that I can't remember...) Coldplay -- Twisted Logic Aimee Mann -- Frankenstein Orbital -- You Lot Beck -- The Information Rob Zombie -- Revenge (Frankenstein) Brian Wilson -- I Just Wasn't Made for These Times ;-) PJ From kevin at kevinfreels.com Wed Mar 19 02:10:50 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:10:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: <20080318191050.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.3c2737bc41.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 19 02:55:57 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:55:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys><200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> Message-ID: <252b01c8896d$5efc9030$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Eliezer writes > Person: "Oh, I've often thought about signing up for cryonics, but I > haven't gotten around to it yet." > > Me: "If you have an accident before you get around to it, it will be > death by stupidity." > > Person (pauses): "Good point." > > I think that as long as not signing up for cryonics for stupid reasons > remains socially acceptable, people are going to go on not signing up > for cryonics for stupid reasons.... Yes. Talk is cheap. By the way, I wonder what proportion of the people who've just posted in this thread are signed up, or have even *tried* signing up? "I'm too young and healthy." (Nicely handled by Eli) "I'm too old and poor". "I live too far away from Michigan." "I live in another country entirely---it's hopeless for me". "It might work, but it might not." Every one of those excuses has a decisive flaw. Take the last for example. I actually had a friend who, in essence actually gave a version of that last answer. He said that he had three reasons for not signing up. (1) It might not work. (2) Future people might not bring him back (3) He might not like living there in the future if they did. His reasons bothered me for several days---something about them seemed somehow...... peculiar. Then suddenly, I realized what it was! I had known people who gave exactly the same three reasons *to* sign up: (1) It might work. (2) Future people might bring me back (3) I might really like living there Talk about my friend looking at the glass as half-empty! Look, all you need is a life-insurance policy with the Cryonics Institute made out as the beneficiary. Take a look at the Michigan based group's web site: http://www.cryonics.org/ At least call them and find out just what they can offer today. Then, after you've found out the bare minimum that is required to give you a chance at beating death, start calling insurance agents. (Start with Rudi Hoffman first, of course, http://www.rudihoffman.com But you may be able to beat the price he can get you.) For example, when I signed up in 1988, I asked my brother what he thought. It took him fifteen seconds or so to say, "What do I have to lose?", and laugh. And, but for the details, he was on-board. We got him a very, very cheap policy out of a company in Oklahoma. It was (and still is for him) less than $300 a year! Why, practically everyone spends more than that every day on food that isn't good for him or her. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LESS THAN A DOLLAR A DAY. Of course, that was when the dollar was worth more, but unless you've checked it out---you won't find out just how cheaply you can get it done. On with my story: Well, that little life insurance company went bankrupt a few years later, but the State of Oklahoma stepped in and took over, and before too long another little company was reaping those monthly or yearly payments. At no point was my brother or Alcor in any danger of not being paid if Alan died. That company was evidently more efficient (all hail the free market system!) because they're still going. So don't worry too much about *what* company you use. Just start making plans *today*. Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 03:25:20 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:25:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200803182225.20159.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > Friends don't let friends die. Note how sick people are: they say no to the attempted suicide of a friend, but are okay with death in general. What's up with this? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 19 03:05:23 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Lee Corbin wrote: > What characteristics are you referring to? Race and therefore > "racial > characteristics" are a scientific fallacy, as surely you realize. Racial characteristics are simply those highly visible ones that despite being very small subset of a person's overall genetic makeup, are used to lump them together and judge them in less than sensible ways. I didn't say that race was a scientific fallacy, I said it was a biological one. Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and other social scientists rather than of biologists. To a biologist, all M&Ms are chocolate on the inside no matter color what color they are on the outside. Genetically there is far more variability within the so-called races than between them. That is to say that if one were to define genetic relatedness as how similar someone is to you in terms of how they are "spelled" by a sequence of the As,Ts,Cs, and Gs instead of whether they are a member of your immediate family or not, then statistically, you should have relatives of another race that is more related to you genetically than any member of your race short of your identical twin. This is because unless your family has been inbreeding for several generations, the most genetic similarity you can have with a child, parent, or sibling is about 50%. But there likely is someone out there in Africa that is related to you on the order 75% or more at the genetic level. > This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume > that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining > Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S. > Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as > though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different > "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. I don't think it is so much a case of ignorance so much as an active social conditioning thrust upon them from birth with an "us versus them" mentality where the "us" is distinguished from the "them" on arbitrary and irrational criteria. In this regard, racists are victims as much as perpetrators. > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine > actually reported an investigation of differences in the > effectiveness > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) Yes I can. There is a gene for skin color after all. (Yes literaly one -it's designation is SLC24A5.) http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/35078.php http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18166528?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum That gene has to reside somewhere on a chromosome and be linked with other genes in the region. So you might share one very short region of the long arm of chromosome 21 with every other person of your so-called race. Now it is inevitable that *some* genes must be linked to the skin color gene because they sit very close to it on the same chromosome. These days most drugs target a single gene. So it is certainly possible for a given drug's effect on a person to correlate with their skin color. It's just not very likely considering you have 23 pairs of chromosomes and they have had those tiny syntenic regions thouroughly shuffled over the aeons. Little bits of you change dance partners every generation and you would be surprised who those little bits of you have danced with over the years. Who they are currently dancing with right now in six and half billion grand ballrooms all over this wet little blue mote. > Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. Sure it does. As a cultural and socioeconomic phenomenon. Not as a biological one. Maybe appealing to your engineering training would help. There are all kinds of automobile types of all kinds of colors. You have red sports cars, pickup trucks, SUVs etc. Now do you think it is rational that your utility function for a particular vehicle to take color as its sole parameter? "All red vehicles are more valuable than blue vehicles." Would you look for spare parts for your vehicle based on the color rather make model or type? Or perhaps I can appeal to your programming knowledge. If you write an 800 megabyte app and I come along and change 1 byte of the program, does the program now become sufficiently different that I can claim it to be my program now? Does your program bear any rational relationship to all the other programs out there that might have that one byte in common with it? Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Mar 19 03:32:17 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:32:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20080319033221.KSPS21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> I was thinking today about Sir Arthur C. Clarke's virtual appearance at the Telluride Tech Fest and also his telephonic presence at TransVision, which Jose Cordero chaired in Caracas. Sir Arthur Clarke was quite a breath of fresh air permeating the lush vegetation, which surrounded the musty old hotel of an overpopulated city in dire need of a lift-off into the 21st century. Natasha From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 19 03:32:33 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Limb Regeneration Message-ID: <438343.84321.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Here is some good news to cheer you all up: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=regrowing-human-limbs "Indeed, when we consider all that we have learned about wound healing and regeneration from studies in various animal models, the surprising conclusion is that we may be only a decade or two away from a day when we can regenerate human body parts. The striking contrast between the behavior of fibroblasts in directing the regeneration response in salamanders versus the fibrotic response leading to scarring in mammals suggests that the road to successful regeneration is lined with these cells. Equally encouraging is the recent discovery by Howard Y. Chang and John L. Rinn of Stanford University that adult human fibroblasts, like salamander fibroblasts, retain a memory of the spatial coordinate system used to establish the body plan early in the embryo?s development. Given that such positional information is re?-quired for regeneration in salamanders, its existence in human fibroblasts enhances the feasibility of tapping into and activating developmental programs necessary for regeneration. Now, as we watch a salamander grow back an arm, we are no longer quite as mystified by how it happens. Soon humans might be able to harness this truly awesome ability ourselves, replacing damaged and diseased body parts at will, perhaps indefinitely." Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 19 03:52:29 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:52:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318224317.02375ed0@satx.rr.com> At 08:05 PM 3/18/2008 -0700, Stuart LaForge wrote: >--- Lee Corbin wrote: > > > What characteristics are you referring to? Race and therefore > > "racial characteristics" are a scientific fallacy, as surely you realize. >... > > Which of course is flat-out impossible, since race doesn't exist. > >Sure it does. As a cultural and socioeconomic phenomenon. Not as a >biological one. Lee's dry sarcasm might have misfired in this case (I was pretty sure it would). Even so, Stuart's response shows nicely why that sarcasm was rather ill-conceived. Even in the case of certain phenotypes linked together by history and local selective pressures, the "race" of an individual is just shorthand to the heightened likelihood of finding the expressed character in question. Since we know the evil consequences of easily making such "racial" linkages, there are sound motives to walk very carefully in using such shortcuts when they are really superficial or due to accidents of culture and political choice. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 19 04:41:55 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:41:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] RIP ACC In-Reply-To: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803190442.m2J4g9h9019295@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Arthur C. Clarke 1928-2008 Any sufficiently Clarke-like writer is indistinguishable from god. spike From fauxever at sprynet.com Wed Mar 19 04:55:38 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:55:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] RIP ACC References: <200803190442.m2J4g9h9019295@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <000701c8897d$7a151b20$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> That would be 1917-2008. ----- Original Message ----- From: "spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:41 PM Subject: [ExI] RIP ACC > Arthur C. Clarke 1928-2008 > > Any sufficiently Clarke-like writer is indistinguishable from god. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Wed Mar 19 04:56:21 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:56:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> Message-ID: <478483.7102.qm@web30406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" >Give me a god-damned break. I suppose *he* didn't >have any friends who might be sad when he was gone? >Like half the science-fiction community? You've got >to draw a line in time, somewhere. He didn't want >to visit the Moon someday? And why didn't he have >CI freeze his dog, if he cared that much? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AiHlbimLZI Just a reflection Anna Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca From jonkc at att.net Wed Mar 19 06:03:56 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 02:03:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> I am sad, very very sad. John K Clark From max at maxmore.com Wed Mar 19 06:21:44 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 01:21:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] RIP ACC In-Reply-To: <200803190442.m2J4g9h9019295@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> <200803190442.m2J4g9h9019295@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <20080319062146.JVOT1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Any sufficiently advanced form of death is indistinguishable from continued life. Max At 11:41 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote: >Arthur C. Clarke 1928-2008 > >Any sufficiently Clarke-like writer is indistinguishable from god. > >spike > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 07:32:25 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:32:25 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com> <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <470a3c520803190032j7e03674fsa38735cced8a9877@mail.gmail.com> When I was about five or six, to keep me quiet on the beach, my mother gave me a book of Sir Arthur C. Clarke to read. I became immediately interested in science and the future, and I have been a transhumanist ever since. Thanks to my mother, and thanks to Sir Arthur. I think many transhumanists have similar stories to tell. I think we should build a web memorial to Sir Arthur, with quotes of people who became scientists, engineers, and transhumanists due to the inspiration they found in his works. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 07:56:05 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:56:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com> <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <2d6187670803190056t2637a2a3me5dfef90b31bb3b0@mail.gmail.com> John K. Clark wrote: I am sad, very very sad. >>> So am I. In many ways my introduction to proto-Transhumanist ideas came from Arthur C. Clarke. Between watching the film masterpiece "2001," and reading "Childhood's End" and my beloved "Profiles of the Future," I owe him such a debt of gratitude. What other prominent SF writers are out there that are old and/or in bad health and soon may die? Max More wrote: When a real visionary like ACC passively and consciously accepts the permanent extinction of natural death, I can't but help find it a bit depressing. >>> I thought among old school Secular Humanists/Atheists that accepting death/oblivion of the self was seen as noble and even sort of "macho." I've heard that only a relatively tiny fraction of science fiction writers are signed up or at least even seriously interested in cryonics. A common notion among cryonicists/Transhumanists is that a SF writer would be vastly more prone toward wanting a cryonics policy but that does not seem to be the case. They may be great at imagining possible future worlds but that does not mean they really want to *live* in the reality of whatever our distant future is if it means upsetting friends, family and the status quo in an attempt to get there. Max More wrote: Truly, I don't hold Clarke's decision against him (much). Still, it's worth pointing out the cold underlying reality of his thinking. >>> As cryonicists have pointed out, it's very ironic when a bestselling SF writer like Clarke declines being frozen and yet a humble tv repairman, etc., will grasp the opportunity and make arrangements to have it done when they die. Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: I think that as long as not signing up for cryonics for stupid reasons remains socially acceptable, people are going to go on not signing up for cryonics for stupid reasons. Only when they realize that everyone else is going to look at them like they're an idiot, will it occur to them that they might be doing something idiotic. What we need around here is more peer pressure. Friends don't let friends die. >>> Eliezer, are there smart reasons for not signing up for cryonics? lol I do like the idea of positive peer pressure to make sure "friends don't let friend die!" : ) I think this is why having local chapters of various Transhumanist/cryonicist groups is so important. Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: The following is a public service announcement: PLEASE STOP DYING >>> Sadly, this is still much easier said than done... John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pratt.cd at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 02:40:59 2008 From: pratt.cd at gmail.com (chris pratt) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:40:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles In-Reply-To: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <200803180043.34370.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2b72fd410803181940k7e832282p38c4fc912f4300e6@mail.gmail.com> On 3/18/08, Bryan Bishop wrote: > http://shiriah.net/ayreon/Disc%201/07-Ayreon%20-%20Ride%20The%20Comet.mp3 > > Find your way home, little extremophiles > Find your way home, donors of life > You're on your own, little extremophiles > You're on your own, cleaving the skies > > [Chorus]: > Carry out our dangerous task > Sail uncharted spheres > Live out our dreams, ride the comet > Journey on the Migrator trail > Cross the new frontiers > Pass on our genes, ride the comet > > ---------- > > On that note, any other scifi bands out there worth mentioning? > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com From kuromaku at hush.com Wed Mar 19 08:32:33 2008 From: kuromaku at hush.com (kuromaku at hush.com) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:32:33 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) Message-ID: <20080319083233.D77411A0039@mailserver8.hushmail.com> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 05:05:23 +0200 The Avantguardian wrote: >--- Lee Corbin wrote: > >> What characteristics are you referring to? Race and therefore >> "racial >> characteristics" are a scientific fallacy, as surely you >realize. > >Racial characteristics are simply those highly visible ones that >despite being very small subset of a person's overall genetic >makeup, >are used to lump them together and judge them in less than >sensible >ways. I didn't say that race was a scientific fallacy, I said it >was a >biological one. Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the >purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and other social >scientists >rather than of biologists. To a biologist, all M&Ms are chocolate >on >the inside no matter color what color they are on the outside. > >Genetically there is far more variability within the so-called >races >than between them. That is to say that if one were to define >genetic >relatedness as how similar someone is to you in terms of how they >are >"spelled" by a sequence of the As,Ts,Cs, and Gs instead of whether >they >are a member of your immediate family or not, then statistically, >you >should have relatives of another race that is more related to you >genetically than any member of your race short of your identical >twin. > >This is because unless your family has been inbreeding for several >generations, the most genetic similarity you can have with a >child, >parent, or sibling is about 50%. But there likely is someone out >there >in Africa that is related to you on the order 75% or more at the >genetic level. I'd say that's a bit stupid way of looking at the thing.Why do you downplay the race differences because it may be possible to find a black man who is genetically close to you even though the probability of finding a black person like that *must* be lower than the probability of finding a white man who is genetically very much like you as long as there are significant differences between the group averages? I understand that's what the establishment wants you to think though for possibly shady reasons. Some related thoughts at my blog at http://psychogenesis.thinkertothinker.com/?p=122 though I -- Click here for free information on starting a business from your home. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/Ioyw6h4dA5RzdwrJZT5WZdgCOwxJckcxwArVRymM4A3I5ZxFMPL4k2/ estimate you will not enjoy it. From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Wed Mar 19 10:27:13 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:27:13 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Cryonics (wa re:arthur c clarke dies) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4477.22109.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> >I actually had a friend who, in essence actually gave >a version of that >last answer. He said that he had three reasons for >not signing up. > > (1) It might not work. > (2) Future people might not bring him back > (3) He might not like living there in the >future if they did. I was at the NextroBritannia meeting at the weekend (missed most of the actual meeting except for Ander's presentation, but the discussion afterwards was great). We actually discussed cryonics a little, and it turned out one of the people there was a clinical perfusionist who's job is keeping people's brains supplied with enough oxygen while their hearts are stopped for surgical reasons. It turns out you can be kept alive without your own heart beating for a long time (this doesn't happen often, but people have survived long periods while waiting for transplant). During this discussion, I mentioned the comic book "Transmetropolitan" and Anders talked about how he enjoyed it. In it, there's a story about a woman revived from cryonic preservation - many of her dramatic memories of the twentieth century appear fleetingly, and the damage done to her by a tumour is reversed. However, the language barrier between her and the people of the future city is too great, and she ends up living on the streets with the other crazy homeless people, some of whom are also lost in this future world. (Transmetropolitan is about a Hunter S Thompson-like gonzo journalist in a far future city, and addresses many transhuman themes, such as people downloading themselves into utility fog, people mixing their DNA with the DNA of aliens who sold their genome for cash, cultural enclaves, nanotech problems - it's an interesting fictional treatment of many things we're interested in) I guess that fear of the future, or future shock, are a real stumbling block for cryonics. Anders Sandberg repeatedly made the point that he believed future shock was a real problem for communicating transhumanist ideas in general. We can see that recovering people from cryogenic freezing isn't going to happen soon - but how far away is it? The range of estimates from twenty years to well over a hundred has people scared - by the time they get thawed, will they be able to adapt? Alcor makes it clear on their website that cryonics is a last in, first out business. Thinking of Alcor brings up another point - Alcor and Cryonics International have different approaches and pricing, and postings on the net from supporters of each approach can only serve to muddy the water and raise people's doubts as to how feasible cryonics is. One final point, again referring to fiction - Clifford D Simak wrote a fine novel called "Why call them back from heaven?" where the world's industry is mostly owned by the gigantic trust fund for people who've been cryopreserved. Everyone is busy trying to save for an eternal,immortal future. The main character is an ambulance repair technician who's negligence causes an ambulance to fail to reach someone in time to preserve them. For this negligent homicide, he is sentenced to death - the chip that monitors his life signs and summons the cryonics team when he dies is removed. On his travels as a man doomed to die, he meets religious people with an objection to immortality, and uncovers a plot to suppress information that shows there is not enough space to restore everyone who's ever been preserved. This book shows one vision of the world could be affected if everyone, en masse, opts for cryonics. Tom ___________________________________________________________ Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 19 13:22:51 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:22:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: At SwRI in Boulder, we heard the of news of Arthur C. Clarke's death while in the middle of a meeting, where the scientists are writing spacecraft sequencing commands for the New Horizons Pluto Encounter in July 2015. To my mind, the two events were strikingly incongruent. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Wed Mar 19 15:28:22 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:28:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics References: <4477.22109.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <25cb01c889d6$8663e740$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Tom Nowell writes ---by the way, Tom gave *no* attribution whose remarks he was replying to. Not only is it bad form, but I rather resent being quoted without credit.--- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Nowell" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 3:27 AM Subject: [ExI] Cryonics (wa re:arthur c clarke dies) > [Lee Corbin wrote] > > > I actually had a friend who, in essence actually gave > > a version of that > > last answer. He said that he had three reasons for > > not signing up. > > > > (1) It might not work. > > (2) Future people might not bring him back > > (3) He might not like living there in the > > future if they did. I have to add, for anyone who missed it, that those very three reasons can be *advanced* for signing up--- namely, it might work, future people might bring us back, and we might like very much living in the future. Anyway, Tom goes on about a rather delightful story: > I was at the NextroBritannia meeting at the weekend > (missed most of the actual meeting except for Ander's > presentation, but the discussion afterwards was > great). > We actually discussed cryonics a little, and it turned > out one of the people there was a clinical > perfusionist who's job is keeping people's brains > supplied with enough oxygen while their hearts are > stopped for surgical reasons. It turns out you can be > kept alive without your own heart beating for a long > time (this doesn't happen often, but people have > survived long periods while waiting for transplant). > > During this discussion, I mentioned the comic book > "Transmetropolitan".... Lee From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 19 17:09:10 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:09:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Highly Profitable Sexual Practices Message-ID: <8CA57FB14FEEABC-1224-416@webmail-nb16.sysops.aol.com> "Olga wrote: Don't forget that even these days ... there are still far too many women who marry for money (whether they like to acknowledge this to themselves or not). Don't get me started on this subject :). Harlotry has *nothing* on many bona-fide wifeys. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Me aka Terry:Do you mean bona-fide partners do not get any material benefits? Maybe some but emotional support counts a lot to a happy marriage. Statistics may vary from culture to culture and from time to time. I'd not generalize what I experienced to be the same for everyone. Humans are still narcissitic by nature and would seek sexual partners that they think will make them satisfied/happy or the envy of others perceived as competitors for the affection and our society reinforces this competition not unlike the behavior of our cousins {the apes} except humans have developed some inhibitory behavior like shame and guilt. _{Terry {a mom of two adult kids}_________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John Grigg: "I'm impressed and suprised that a women today would still acknowledge this fact (I used to date a woman who fiercely argued that this was no longer true). I'd be very interested to get you started on this topic! : ) The whole concept of "social currency" in mate selection totally fascinates me. I think a male with lots of resources/money can be very tempting marriage material even when the woman in her heart of hearts knows she is not in love with him. But then we could get into a discussion of what love/falling in love truly is and what causes it. I find it interesting how reaching the "falling in love" critical mass can be very similar and yet different for every person." John Grigg <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Me: Hormones cause the behavior of why teenagers fall in love. Testosterone level rise in males during the sexual development and in females the estrogen hormone starts about the age of puberty for both sexes. Nature of which we are a part gave us genes to preserve the species. Terry From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 19 19:51:01 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:51:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> References: <33133859.1205879060907.JavaMail.root@ps35.mc.tiscali.sys> <200803181819.01008.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> <47E06895.1020504@pobox.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080319144714.026dfc78@satx.rr.com> At 06:12 PM 3/18/2008 -0700, Eliezer wrote: >What we need around here is more peer pressure. Friends don't let >friends die. What we need around here is more understanding. As you know from bitter experience, friends don't always have a lot of say in the matter. And sometimes, after they've had their say, friends should just butt out. Damien Broderick From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Mar 19 22:28:07 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:28:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:05 PM, The Avantguardian < avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote: > > --- Lee Corbin wrote: > > > What characteristics are you referring to? Race and therefore > > "racial > > characteristics" are a scientific fallacy, as surely you realize. > > Racial characteristics are simply those highly visible ones that > despite being very small subset of a person's overall genetic makeup, > are used to lump them together and judge them in less than sensible > ways. ### No. Racial characteristics are inherited properties (i.e. alleles) that allow the grouping of humans into large groups of persons related by common ancestry. Whether a characteristic is phenotypic, visible, or not, does determine whether it is a racial characteristic. ---------------------------------------------------- > I didn't say that race was a scientific fallacy, I said it was a > biological one. ### No, race is a biological fact. ------------------------------- > Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the > purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and other social scientists > rather than of biologists. ### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property related to common descent. -------------------------------------- > To a biologist, all M&Ms are chocolate on > the inside no matter color what color they are on the outside. ### Huh? ---------------------------------- Genetically there is far more variability within the so-called races > than between them. ### Look up "Lewontin's Fallacy". -------------------------------------------- > That is to say that if one were to define genetic > relatedness as how similar someone is to you in terms of how they are > "spelled" by a sequence of the As,Ts,Cs, and Gs instead of whether they > are a member of your immediate family or not, then statistically, you > should have relatives of another race that is more related to you > genetically than any member of your race short of your identical twin. ### No. Actually impossible. Since race is defined by common descent, you can't be more closely related to a person of another race than to members of your own race. It's simply impossible by definition. ------------------------------------------------ > This is because unless your family has been inbreeding for several > generations, the most genetic similarity you can have with a child, > parent, or sibling is about 50%. But there likely is someone out there > in Africa that is related to you on the order 75% or more at the > genetic level. ### Really, totally ridiculous. --------------------------------------------------- > > > > This is an important point. Many people today ignorantly assume > > that there is some racial difference between two of the remaining > > Democratic Party candidates running for president here in the U.S. > > Time and time I hear one of them being regarded as "black", as > > though he were of a different "race", or were partly of a different > > "race". You would not believe how widespread this fallacy is here. ### I have a PhD in human molecular genetics from Ruprecht-Karls Universitat in Heidelberg, Germany. I say that Ms Clinton and Mr Obama are of different races. Who's ignorant? ----------------------------------------------- I don't think it is so much a case of ignorance so much as an activesocial conditioning thrust upon them from birth with an "us versusthem" mentality where the "us" is distinguished from the "them" on > arbitrary and irrational criteria. In this regard, racists are victims > as much as perpetrators. ### Assholes will always find a reason to hate an outgroup. This is completely irrelevant to the biological question of whether you can divide humans into large groups related by descent. --------------------------------------------------- > > > > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine > > actually reported an investigation of differences in the > > effectiveness > > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" > > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't > > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge > > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) > > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people > > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- > > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) ### I really despise the idea that somebody would denounce and suppress life-saving research, if that research acknowledges the biological reality of race. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 19 22:46:06 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:46:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.co m> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080319174304.023689c8@satx.rr.com> At 06:28 PM 3/19/2008 -0400, Rafal wrote of Stuart's quote from Lee: > > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine > > actually reported an investigation of differences in the > > effectiveness > > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" > > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't > > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge > > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) > > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people > > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- > > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) > >### I really despise the idea that somebody would denounce and >suppress life-saving research, if that research acknowledges the >biological reality of race. Lee, for the lova dog, will you please explain that this was a sardonic reductio ad absurdum, not a genuine position statement. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Mar 19 23:47:08 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:47:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.co m> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> At 06:28 PM 3/19/2008 -0400, Rafal wrote: [Stuart:] >Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the >purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and other social scientists >rather than of biologists. > >### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property >related to common descent. Oh, the innocence. Sally Hemings' mother, Betty Hemings, was the daughter of the English Captain Hemings and a black slave woman brought from Africa (Wikipedia says), so her kids by Jefferson were three-quarters "white." That surely made them white, eh? Oh yeah? Obama's mother was a "white" USian from Kansas and his father a "black" Kenyan, so he's--what? How does the US culture refer to his "race"? Arbitrarily-chosen phenotypic markers are determined by biology, obviously; the "race" of Hemings and her children and Barack Obama is determined by--what? Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 20 00:00:31 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:00:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319174304.023689c8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <25f801c88a1e$0aac86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien requests about my sardonic original reply to The Avantguardian that I explain. BTW folks, real busy here. Didn't mean to act the troll. I was going to respond tomorrow, cannot today, except for what follows very briefly: Damien wrote > At 06:28 PM 3/19/2008 -0400, Rafal wrote of Stuart's quote from Lee: > >> > It gets worse. Much worse. The New England Journal of Medicine >> > actually reported an investigation of differences in the >> > effectiveness >> > of two types of hypertension medication in the so-called "black" >> > people and the so-called "white" people here in the U.S. You won't >> > believe this, but they even went on---surely in the full knowledge >> > that race is a biological fallacy (they're surely not that un-read) >> > ---to allude to a so-called "fact" that the so-called "black" people >> > are more likely than the so-called "white" people to have nitric- >> > oxide insufficiency. (Can you believe it??) Heavy into ridicule (a fair weapon when you suspect you're in the minority). But Damien, I *do* believe that Stuart got it--- he just chose not to play games and just lay it all out the way he thinks it is. Rafal then says >>### I really despise the idea that somebody would denounce and >>suppress life-saving research, if that research acknowledges the >>biological reality of race. > > Lee, for the lova dog, will you please explain that this was a > sardonic reductio ad absurdum, not a genuine position statement. Damien, I also strongly suspect that Rafal "got it" too. But nonetheless your advice is to be heeded: lurkers by the galore might not get it. Thanks everyone for now! Lee From michaelanissimov at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 00:09:21 2008 From: michaelanissimov at gmail.com (Michael Anissimov) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:09:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Anissimov on FastForward Radio Message-ID: <51ce64f10803191709g707dc151ie88c20e7a5437a50@mail.gmail.com> Hey friends, I recently went on Phil Bowermaster and Stephen Gordon's FastForward Radio, over at the Speculist. Here is the show: http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001675.html And here is a short summary of what we talked about: http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/?p=680 Listen and enjoy! -- Michael Anissimov Lifeboat Foundation http://lifeboat.com http://acceleratingfuture.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 20 00:48:29 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:48:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> First Spike said: > Olga, I see Wright is in the headline news for the third day. Future > historians may see the Wright material coming into the public > awareness as the beginning of the end of Obama's presidential hopes. Then Olga Responded: << Not so fast, fella! (Was this a great speech, or what?): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/us/politics/18text-obama.html?_r=1&oref=sl ogin :) >> I agree it was a good speech Olga. And I think people feel sorry for him because they wanted to like him but not many believe that he didn't know that that was going on at a church he regularly attended. This is all that people are talking about on the news now and he is dropping dramatically in the polls already. Even his attack on McCain's Iraq blunder became suspect as newscasters interpreted this as his attempt to take the focus off of Wright and the racial issue. I'm not sure how to predict the outcome now that he's ahead so many delegates but if he wins the nomination. I have talked to several middle class democrats who have said they'll break the party lines and vote for McCain. The local liberal Pittsburgh NPR affiliate even went to restaurants around Pittsburgh at breakfast and talked to patrons having their coffee and the story was the same. People are very suspicious now of what Obama's true intentions and priorities would be if he was president. I can't believe the last election whas handed to Bush by Ralph Nader and now this one may handed to Hohn McCain by Obama. I want to see a democratic poll now that asks democrats if Obama was elected would they vote for McCain. I think the democratic party had better look closely at this or we're in for another four years of war and the bankruptcy of our country if enough democrats jump and vote for McCain.. From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 20 01:17:37 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:17:37 -0600 Subject: [ExI] More words of Arthur C. Clarke Message-ID: ---Forwarded from NEO News Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:44:28 -0700 From: David Morrison To: David Morrison Subject: NEO News (03/19/08) Arthur C. Clarke Dies NEO News (03/19/08) Arthur C. Clarke Dies Science fact and science fiction lost one of our most visionary and influential heroes with the death of Arthur C. Clarke. Following are several obituaries. None of them comment, however, on Clarke's contribution to our field by providing the name for the Spaceguard Survey. The name "Spaceguard" was suggested by the NASA Spaceguard Workshop (which I chaired) in 1992. This name had been coined in Clarke's novel "Rendezvous with Rama", for a future system to detect any incoming asteroids or comets in time to protect the Earth from a catastrophic impact. Clarke graciously endorsed our use of the term, which has become synonymous with asteroid surveys. He himself supported our efforts to initiate this survey and was pleased to have his name associated with such a worthy endeavor. Partly inspired by the new attention to the impact hazard, Clarke wrote in 1994 a novel on this theme: "Hammer of God". The plot concerns efforts to deflect a large cometary object on a collision course with Earth. This novel was acquired by a Hollywood studio and became part of basis for the 1998 film "Deep Impact", although Clarke himself did not write the script. All of us who have been entertained and inspired by Sir Arthur Clarke's writings mourn his passing. David Morrison ==================================== Arthur C. Clarke, 90, Science Fiction Writer, Dies By Gerald Jonas New York Times: March 19, 2008 Arthur C. Clarke, a writer whose seamless blend of scientific expertise and poetic imagination helped usher in the space age, died early Wednesday in Colombo, Sri Lanka, where he had lived since 1956. He was 90. Rohan de Silva, an aide, confirmed the death and said Mr. Clarke had been experiencing breathing problems, The Associated Press reported. He had suffered from post-polio syndrome for the last two decades. The author of almost 100 books, Mr. Clarke was an ardent promoter of the idea that humanity's destiny lay beyond the confines of Earth. It was a vision served most vividly by "2001: A Space Odyssey," the classic 1968 science-fiction film he created with the director Stanley Kubrick and the novel of the same title that he wrote as part of the project. His work was also prophetic: his detailed forecast of telecommunications satellites in 1945 came more than a decade before the first orbital rocket flight. Other early advocates of a space program argued that it would pay for itself by jump-starting new technology. Mr. Clarke set his sights higher. Borrowing a phrase from William James, he suggested that exploring the solar system could serve as the "moral equivalent of war," giving an outlet to energies that might otherwise lead to nuclear holocaust. Mr. Clarke's influence on public attitudes toward space was acknowledged by American astronauts and Russian cosmonauts, by scientists like the astronomer Carl Sagan and by movie and television producers. Gene Roddenberry credited Mr. Clarke's writings with giving him courage to pursue his "Star Trek" project in the face of indifference, even ridicule, from television executives. In his later years, after settling in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), Mr. Clarke continued to bask in worldwide acclaim as both a scientific sage and the pre-eminent science fiction writer of the 20th century. In 1998, he was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II. Mr. Clarke played down his success in foretelling a globe-spanning network of communications satellites. "No one can predict the future," he always maintained. But as a science fiction writer he couldn't resist drawing up timelines for what he called "possible futures." Far from displaying uncanny prescience, these conjectures mainly demonstrated his lifelong, and often disappointed, optimism about the peaceful uses of technology - from his calculation in 1945 that atomic-fueled rockets could be no more than 20 years away to his conviction in 1999 that "clean, safe power" from "cold fusion" would be commercially available in the first years of the new millennium. Popularizer of Science Mr. Clarke was well aware of the importance of his role as science spokesman to the general population: "Most technological achievements were preceded by people writing and imagining them," he noted. "I'm sure we would not have had men on the Moon," he added, if it had not been for H. G. Wells and Jules Verne. "I'm rather proud of the fact that I know several astronauts who became astronauts through reading my books." Arthur Charles Clarke was born on Dec. 16, 1917, in the seaside town of Minehead, Somerset, England. His father was a farmer; his mother a post office telegrapher. The eldest of four children, he was educated as a scholarship student at a secondary school in the nearby town of Taunton. He remembered a number of incidents in early childhood that awakened his scientific imagination: exploratory rambles along the Somerset shoreline, with its "wonderland of rock pools"; a card from a pack of cigarettes that his father showed him, with a picture of a dinosaur; the gift of a Meccano set, a British construction toy similar to American Erector Sets. He also spent time, he said, "mapping the moon" through a telescope he constructed himself out of "a cardboard tube and a couple of lenses." But the formative event of his childhood was his discovery, at age 13 - the year his father died - of a copy of Astounding Stories of Super-Science, then the leading American science fiction magazine. He found its mix of boyish adventure and far-out (sometimes bogus) science intoxicating. While still in school, he joined the newly formed British Interplanetary Society, a small band of sci-fi enthusiasts who held the controversial view that space travel was not only possible but could be achieved in the not-so-distant future. In 1937, a year after he moved to London to take a civil service job, he began writing his first science fiction novel, a story of the far, far future that was later published as "Against the Fall of Night" (1953). Mr. Clarke spent World War II as an officer in the Royal Air Force. In 1943 he was assigned to work with a team of American scientist-engineers who had developed the first radar-controlled system for landing airplanes in bad weather. That experience led to Mr. Clarke's only non-science fiction novel, "Glide Path" (1963). More important, it led in 1945 to a technical paper, published in the British journal Wireless World, establishing the feasibility of artificial satellites as relay stations for Earth-based communications. The meat of the paper was a series of diagrams and equations showing that "space stations" parked in a circular orbit roughly 22,240 miles above the equator would exactly match the Earth's rotation period of 24 hours. In such an orbit, a satellite would remain above the same spot on the ground, providing a "stationary" target for transmitted signals, which could then be retransmitted to wide swaths of territory below. This so-called geostationary orbit has been officially designated the Clarke Orbit by the International Astronomical Union. Decades later, Mr. Clarke called his Wireless World paper "the most important thing I ever wrote." In a wry piece entitled, "A Short Pre-History of Comsats, Or: How I Lost a Billion Dollars in My Spare Time," he claimed that a lawyer had dissuaded him from applying for a patent. The lawyer, he said, thought the notion of relaying signals from space was too far-fetched to be taken seriously. But Mr. Clarke also acknowledged that nothing in his paper - from the notion of artificial satellites to the mathematics of the geostationary orbit - was new. His chief contribution was to clarify and publicize an idea whose time had almost come: it was a feat of consciousness-raising of the kind he would continue to excel at throughout his career. A Fiction Career Is Born The year 1945 also saw the start of Mr. Clarke's career as a fiction writer. He sold a short story called "Rescue Party" to the same magazine - now re-titled Astounding Science Fiction - that had captured his imagination 15 years earlier. For the next two years Mr. Clarke attended King's College, London, on the British equivalent of a G.I. Bill scholarship, graduating in 1948 with first-class honors in physics and mathematics. But he continued to write and sell stories, and after a stint as assistant editor at the scientific journal Physics Abstracts, he decided he could support himself as a free-lance writer. Success came quickly. His primer on space flight, "The Exploration of Space," became an American Book-of-the-Month Club selection. Over the next two decades he wrote a series of nonfiction bestsellers as well as his best-known novels, including "Childhood's End" (1953) and "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968). For a scientifically trained writer whose optimism about technology seemed boundless, Mr. Clarke delighted in confronting his characters with obstacles they could not overcome without help from forces beyond their comprehension. In "Childhood's End," a race of aliens who happen to look like devils imposes peace on an Earth torn by Cold War tensions. But the aliens' real mission is to prepare humanity for the next stage of evolution. In an ending that is both heartbreakingly poignant and literally earth-shattering, Mr. Clarke suggests that mankind can escape its suicidal tendencies only by ceasing to be human. "There was nothing left of Earth," he wrote. "It had nourished them, through the fierce moments of their inconceivable metamorphosis, as the food stored in a grain of wheat feeds the infant plant while it climbs towards the Sun." The Cold War also forms the backdrop for "2001." Its genesis was a short story called "The Sentinel," first published in a science fiction magazine in 1951. It tells of an alien artifact found on the Moon, a little crystalline pyramid that explorers from Earth destroy while trying to open. One explorer realizes that the artifact was a kind of fail-safe beacon; in silencing it, human beings have signaled their existence to its far-off creators. Enter Stanley Kubrick In the spring of 1964, Stanley Kubrick, fresh from his triumph with "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb," met Mr. Clarke in New York, and the two agreed to make the "proverbial really good science fiction movie" based on "The Sentinel." This led to a four-year collaboration; Mr. Clarke wrote the novel and Mr. Kubrick produced and directed the film; they are jointly credited with the screenplay. Many reviewers were puzzled by the film, especially the final scene in which an astronaut who has been transformed by aliens returns to orbit the Earth as a "Star-Child." In the book he demonstrates his new-found powers by detonating from space the entire arsenal of Soviet and United States nuclear weapons. Like much of the plot, this denouement is not clear in the film, from which Mr. Kubrick cut most of the expository material. As a fiction writer, Mr. Clarke was often criticized for failing to create fully realized characters. HAL, the mutinous computer in "2001," is probably his most "human" creation: a self-satisfied know-it-all with a touching but misguided faith in his own infallibility. If Mr. Clarke's heroes are less than memorable, it's also true that there are no out-and-out villains in his work; his characters are generally too busy struggling to make sense of an implacable universe to engage in petty schemes of dominance or revenge. Mr. Clarke's own relationship with machines was somewhat ambivalent. Although he held a driver's license as a young man, he never drove a car. Yet he stayed in touch with the rest of the world from his home in Sri Lanka through an ever-expanding collection of up-to-date computers and communications accessories. And until his health declined, he was an expert scuba diver in the waters around Sri Lanka. He first became interested in diving in the early 1950s, when he realized that he could find underwater, he said, something very close to the weightlessness of outer space. He settled permanently in Colombo, the capital of what was then Ceylon, in 1956. With a partner, he established a guided diving service for tourists and wrote vividly about his diving experiences in a number of books, beginning with "The Coast of Coral" (1956). Of his scores of books, some like "Childhood's End," have been in print continuously. His works have been translated into some 40 languages, and worldwide sales have been estimated at more than $25 million. In 1962 he suffered a severe attack of polio. His apparently complete recovery was marked by a return to top form at his favorite sport, table tennis. But in 1984 he developed post-polio syndrome, a progressive condition characterized by muscle weakness and extreme fatigue. He spent the last years of his life in a wheelchair. Clarke's Three Laws Among his legacies are Clarke's Three Laws, provocative observations on science, science fiction and society that were published in his "Profiles of the Future" (1962): ?"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." ?"The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible." ?"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Along with Verne and Wells, Mr. Clarke said his greatest influences as a writer were Lord Dunsany, a British fantasist noted for his lyrical, if sometimes overblown, prose; Olaf Stapledon, a British philosopher who wrote vast speculative narratives that projected human evolution to the farthest reaches of space and time; and Herman Melville's "Moby-Dick." While sharing his passions for space and the sea with a worldwide readership, Mr. Clarke kept his emotional life private. He was briefly married in 1953 to an American diving enthusiast named Marilyn Mayfield; they separated after a few months and were divorced in 1964, having had no children. One of his closest relationships was with Leslie Ekanayake, a fellow diver in Sri Lanka, who died in a motorcycle accident in 1977. Mr. Clarke shared his home in Colombo with his friend's brother, Hector, his partner in the diving business; Hector's wife, Valerie; and their three daughters. Mr. Clarke reveled in his fame. One whole room in his house - which he referred to as the Ego Chamber - was filled with photos and other memorabilia of his career, including pictures of him with Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, and Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon. Mr. Clarke's reputation as a prophet of the space age rests on more than a few accurate predictions. His visions helped bring about the future he longed to see. His contributions to the space program were lauded by Charles Kohlhase, who planned NASA's Cassini mission to Saturn and who said of Mr. Clarke, "When you dream what is possible, and add a knowledge of physics, you make it happen." At the time of his death he was working on another novel, "The Last Theorem," Agence France-Presse reported. " The Last Theorem' has taken a lot longer than I expected," the agency quoted him as saying. "That could well be my last novel, but then I've said that before." ======================================= Sir Arthur C. Clarke Dies at 80 By Lech Mintowt-Czyz and Steve Bird The Times, 18 March 2008 Sir Arthur C. Clarke, the science fiction writer, has died aged 90 in his adopted home of Sri Lanka, it was confirmed tonight. Clarke, who had battled debilitating post-polio syndrome since the 1960s and sometimes used a wheelchair, died at 1:30am after suffering breathing problems, his personal secretary Rohan De Silva said. "Sir Arthur passed away a short while ago at the Apollo Hospital [in Colombo]. He had a cardio-respiratory attack," he said. His valet, W. K. M. Dharmawardena, said that funeral arrangements would be finalised when his close family returned to the island from Australia. Mr Dharmawardena said that Clarke's condition had begun to deteriorate in recent weeks and he had been in hospital for four days. The visionary author of more than 70 books, who was nominated for a Nobel Prize after predicting the existence of satellites, was most famous for his short story "The Sentinel", which was expanded into the novel that was later adapted for Stanley Kubrick's film "2001: A Space Odyssey". He was also credited with inventing the concept of communications satellites in 1945, decades before they became a reality. Clarke was the last surviving member of what was sometimes known as the "Big Three" of science fiction, alongside Robert A. Heinlein and Isaac Asimov. The astronomer Sir Patrick Moore said that his friend was a "great visionary, brilliant science-fiction writer and great forecaster". "He said there would be a man on the Moon by 1970, while I said 1980 - and he was right," he said. "He was ahead of his time in so many ways. I'm very, very sad that he's gone." The pair met at the British Interplanetary Society in the 1930s and became friends. Sir Patrick said he spoke to the author a few weeks ago and was concerned about his health. The son of an English farming family, Clarke was born in the seaside town of Minehead, Somerset, England on December 16, 1917. His father died when he was 13. After attending schools in his home county, Arthur Clarke moved to London in 1936. There he pursued his early interest in space sciences by joining the British Interplanetary Society. He started to contribute to the BIS Bulletin and began to write science fiction. With the onset of World War II he joined the RAF, eventually becoming an officer in charge of the first radar talk-down equipment, the Ground Controlled Approach, during its experimental trials. Later, his only non-science-fiction novel, Glide Path, was based on this work. In 1945, the UK periodical magazine "Wireless World" published his landmark technical paper "Extra-terrestrial Relays" in which he first set out the principles of satellite communication with satellites in geostationary orbits, a speculation that was realised 25 years later. He was paid ?15 for the article. During the evolution of his discovery, he worked with scientists and engineers in the USA in the development of spacecraft and launch systems, and addressed the United Nations during their deliberations on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Today, the geostationary orbit at 36,000 kilometres above the Equator is named The Clarke Orbit by the International Astronomical Union. Clarke is best known as a visionary science fiction writer. The first story he sold professionally was "Rescue Party", written in March 1945 and appearing in "Astounding Science" in May 1946. He went on to become a prolific writer of science fiction, renowned worldwide with his break coming when "The Sentinel", was noticed by Kubrick. In 1964 he started to work with the noted film producer on a science fiction movie script. Four years later, he shared an Oscar nomination with Kubrick at the Hollywood Academy Awards for the film version of "2001: A Space Odyssey". In television, Clarke worked alongside Walter Cronkite and Wally Schirra for the CBS coverage of the Apollo 12 and 15 space missions. His thirteen-part TV series "Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World" in 1981 and "Arthur C. Clarke's World of Strange Powers" in 1984 have been screened in many countries and he has contributed to other TV series about space, such as Walter Cronkite's "Universe" series in 1981. Clarke first visited Colombo, Sri Lanka (then called Ceylon) in December 1954. He moved there in 1956 and lived there ever since, pursuing an enthusiasm for underwater exploration along that coast and on the Great Barrier Reef. His fascination with diving led to him meeting his wife Marilyn Mayfield, whom he divorced ten years later. In 1998, his lifetime work was recognised when he was honoured with a knighthood - formally conferred by Prince Charles in Sri Lanka two years later. In recent years, he has been largely confined to a wheelchair due to post-polio syndrome, but his output as a writer continued undiminished. Marking his "90th orbit of the Sun" in December, the author said that he did not feel "a day over 89" and made three birthday wishes: for ET to call, for man to kick his oil habit and for peace in Sri Lanka. ===================================== Writer Arthur C. Clarke Dies at 90 By the Associated Press Published: March 19, 2008 COLOMBO, Sri Lanka (AP) -- Even in death Arthur C. Clarke would not compromise his vision. The famed science fiction writer, who once denigrated religion as ''a necessary evil in the childhood of our particular species,'' left written instructions that his funeral be completely secular, according to his aides. ''Absolutely no religious rites of any kind, relating to any religious faith, should be associated with my funeral,'' he wrote. Clarke died early Wednesday at age 90 and was to be buried in a private funeral this weekend in his adopted home of Sri Lanka. Clarke, who had battled debilitating post-polio syndrome for years, had suffered breathing problems in recent days, aide Rohan De Silva said. The visionary author won worldwide acclaim with more than 100 books on space, science and the future. The 1968 story ''2001: A Space Odyssey'' -- written simultaneously as a novel and screenplay with director Stanley Kubrick -- was a frightening prophecy of artificial intelligence run amok. One year after it made Clarke a household name in fiction, the scientist entered the homes of millions of Americans alongside Walter Cronkite anchoring television coverage of the Apollo mission to the moon. Clarke also was credited with the concept of communications satellites in 1945, decades before they became a reality. Geosynchronous orbits, which keep satellites in a fixed position relative to the ground, are called Clarke orbits. His nonfiction volumes on space travel and his explorations of the Great Barrier Reef and Indian Ocean earned him respect in the world of science, and in 1976 he became an honorary fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. But it was his writing that shot him to his greatest fame and that gave him the greatest fulfillment. ''Sometimes I am asked how I would like to be remembered,'' Clarke said recently. ''I have had a diverse career as a writer, underwater explorer and space promoter. Of all these, I would like to be remembered as a writer.'' From 1950, he began a prolific output of both fiction and nonfiction, sometimes publishing three books in a year. A statement from Clarke's office said he had recently reviewed the final manuscript of his latest novel. ''The Last Theorem,'' co-written with Frederik Pohl, will be published later this year, it said. Some of his best-known books are ''Childhood's End,'' 1953; ''The City and The Stars,'' 1956; ''The Nine Billion Names of God,'' 1967; ''Rendezvous with Rama,'' 1973; ''Imperial Earth,'' 1975; and ''The Songs of Distant Earth,'' 1986. When Clarke and Kubrick got together to develop a movie about space, they looked for inspiration to several of Clarke's shorter pieces. As work progressed on the screenplay, Clarke also wrote a novel of the story. He followed it up with ''2010,'' ''2061,'' and ''3001: The Final Odyssey.'' Planetary scientist Torrence Johnson said Clarke's work was a major influence on many in the field. Johnson, who has been exploring the solar system through the Voyager, Galileo and Cassini missions in his 35 years at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, recalled a meeting of planetary scientists and rocket engineers where talk turned to the author. ''All of us around the table said we read Arthur C. Clarke,'' Johnson said. ''That was the thing that got us there.'' In an interview with The Associated Press, Clarke said he did not regret having never traveled to space himself, though he arranged to have DNA from his hair sent into orbit. ''One day, some super civilization may encounter this relic from the vanished species and I may exist in another time,'' he said. ''Move over, Stephen King.'' Clarke, a British citizen, won a host of science fiction awards, and was named a Commander of the British Empire in 1989. Clarke was officially given a knighthood in 1998, but he delayed accepting it for two years after a London tabloid accused him of being a child molester. The allegation was never proved. Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa lauded Clarke for his passion for his adopted home and his efforts to aid its progress. ''We were all proud to have this celebrated author, visionary and promoter of space exploration, prophet of satellite communications, great humanist and lover of animals in our midst,'' he said in a statement. Born in Minehead, western England, on Dec. 16, 1917, the son of a farmer, Arthur Charles Clark became addicted to science fiction after buying his first copies of the pulp magazine ''Amazing Stories'' at Woolworth's. He read English writers H.G. Wells and Olaf Stapledon and began writing for his school magazine in his teens. Clarke went to work as a clerk in Her Majesty's Exchequer and Audit Department in London, where he joined the British Interplanetary Society and wrote his first short stories and scientific articles on space travel. It was not until after World War II that Clarke received a bachelor of science degree in physics and mathematics from King's College in London. Serving in the wartime Royal Air Force, he wrote a 1945 memo about the possibility of using satellites to revolutionize communications. Clarke later sent it to a publication called Wireless World, which almost rejected it as too far-fetched. He moved to Sri Lanka in 1956. In recent years, Clarke was linked by his computer with friends and fans around the world, spending each morning answering e-mails and browsing the Internet. Clarke married in 1953, and was divorced in 1964. He had no children. He is survived by his brother, Fred, and sister, Mary. His body is to be brought to his home in Colombo so friends and fans can pay their respects before his burial. ===================================== Arthur C. Clarke: Luminaries Pay Tribute By Clara Moskowitz Space News: 19 March 2008 As news of Arthur C. Clarke's death spread through communities of scientists, writers and science fiction fans, many people shared their memories of how the visionary writer, inventor and futurist inspired and influenced them. Clarke is famous for his book, "2001: A Space Odyssey" (he also co-wrote the screenplay for the subsequent movie), for coming up with the idea for the communications satellite and for predicting space travel long before humans left Earth. "I think the passing of Arthur C. Clarke is really epical," said Alan Stern, associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate. "There is no one of his caliber or vision on the scene today ... Clarke's contribution was to motivate people to go after careers because they wanted to help shape a certain kind of future, to be at the beginning of something of millennial importance." Stern said Clarke's legacy at NASA and in the space exploration community was particularly significant. "For my generation, the children of Apollo, Clarke's writings were hugely and deeply inspirational," Stern told SPACE.com. "He was not just a technically competent writer of science fiction, science fact and futurism, but he was incredibly optimistic. I have had many emails in the last 18 hours, from friends of mine, from childhood, graduate school, adulthood. It's amazing to me how many say the same thing: 'I wouldn't be in this line of work if it weren't for Arthur Clarke.' People across the world, especially the backbone of American aerospace exploration and space science, were inspired by Clarke's writings at one stage or another in their youth." Clarke had a profound impact on technology and invention. His idea for the communications satellite has affected the whole planet. "Arthur was not only a major figure in the first baby steps in humans' exploration of space, but a major figure in the building up of our planet as an interconnected organism," said writer Ann Druyan, widow of science popularizer Carl Sagan. "He was someone really significant." Druyan said she met Clarke many times over the decades that he and Sagan were friends, as well as after Sagan's death. "He was not only a great technical mind, but of course he had a powerful imagination, which influenced every one of us," Druyan said. "If we use anything based on a communications satellite then we definitely owe Arthur a huge debt. In my mind, '2001' remains the greatest sci-fi movie ever made. In many ways today it seems more futuristic than movies made 30 years later." Many people have wondered how Clarke was able to predict so many elements of the future before they unfolded in reality. "I think it was partially because his mother was a radio telephone operator," Druyan said. "So here he is as a young person growing up in the early part of the 20th century, at a moment where electronic communication was in its fledgling earliest stages, and he is a guy who has an exceptional imagination. So it was the perfect recipe for a child with Arthur's talents to go in that direction. The modesty of his background is yet another reason why it's so important to educate everybody, because you never know where the next Arthur C. Clarke or Carl Sagan could be." Druyan said her friend will be remembered long after his death. "Arthur had a great life," she said. "I don't really feel sadness because I think he had a full measure of life and he used it to the utmost. We are better for [his life]." Clarke also profoundly affected his fellow science fiction authors. "Arthur C. Clarke was one of the giants of science fiction; impossible to ignore, looming over all of us who have come since," said Charles Stross, author of the novels "Saturn's Children" and "Halting State." "He introduced many of us to science fiction for the first time ... He managed, somehow, to combine visions grounded in an understanding of science and engineering with a numinous sense of awe at the scale and beauty of the cosmos in a manner that is all too rare." With Clarke's death, an important epoch in the world of science fiction is over, Stross said. "All of us come to an end eventually, and at 90 years of age Sir Arthur had decent innings," he said. "But I'm still saddened: Along with Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein, he pretty much defined science fiction for those of us of a certain age, and news of his death signals the end of an era, far more than the end of one man." Many writers remember the first Clarke book they read, and the profound effects his work had on them. "My friends and I read Clarke and talked about his fiction with the awe of rabbinical students falling in love with Torah and Talmud," said Orson Scott Card, author of many science fiction novels, including "Ender's Game." "Inarticulate with youth, we would say things like, 'Wasn't it cool when ...' But we were responding to the experience of religious awe, which Arthur C. Clarke's fiction inspired in us." Although Clarke is no longer with us, his work will live on, Card said. "His books have not died," Card told SPACE.com. "They are still alive. As long as we pass them on to the young, open-minded readers who are the natural audience for science fiction, they will continue to inspire and move new generations. The technologies that he explained or forecast will or have become passe; but the deep issues his fiction addresses will live on, and so will our hunger for books like his." A writer's writer Not only did Clarke impact the sweep of human history with his ideas, but he had a very direct effect on the lives of many. "When I met my wife, just shy of fifty years ago, I gave her one book to read, to see whether we could get along - Arthur Clarke's collection of stories, 'Expedition to Earth,'" said Joe Haldeman, author of "The Accidental Time Machine." "She did like it, and we're still going together." Plus, he was a great smoking companion. "I had the great pleasure of watching a couple of Apollo launches with Arthur," Halderman said. "For most of those launches, all of us science fiction writers got together at the house of Joe Green, a writer who worked for NASA. Arthur and I were smokers then, and so were banished to the back porch together. He was a wonderful conversationalist, which I hope made up for the fact that I was tongue-tied, thrust into isolation with an idol of my youth. He was a writer's writer, and a humane and brilliant man. He will be missed, and never replaced." Clarke inspired many young people to pursue science, and shaped the way many scientists approach their work. "He affected how I thought about what I was doing," said Ed Stone, director of the Space Radiation Laboratory at Caltech and project scientist for nine satellite missions, including Voyager. "What he did was take what was happening in science and extrapolate it in a realistic way into way in the future. Since that's what science and engineering and technology are trying to do, to create a new future, it was very interesting to get his ideas of what that future might look like." He helped to make science important and understandable to the public. "One of his main legacies is his really firm belief that science and technology is a defining feature of human evolution," Stone said. "And I of course believe that myself. So he was a very effective writer in capturing the idea of how important science and technology are to human evolution." Staff Writer Dave Mosher contributed reporting to this story. -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ NEO News (now in its fourteenth year of distribution) is an informal compilation of news and opinion dealing with Near Earth Objects (NEOs) and their impacts. These opinions are the responsibility of the individual authors and do not represent the positions of NASA, Ames Research Center, the International Astronomical Union, or any other organization. To subscribe (or unsubscribe) contact dmorrison at arc.nasa.gov. For additional information, please see the website http://impact.arc.nasa.gov. If anyone wishes to copy or redistribute original material from these notes, fully or in part, please include this disclaimer. -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 03:49:27 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:49:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? Message-ID: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Australoid... Do we still need these divisions? Are we not ultimately just one race, the human race, Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent alien race for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 04:10:38 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:10:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> "Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: The following is a public service announcement: PLEASE STOP DYING _________________________ Arthur Clarke is a thought that lives on as memory imprinted on the minds of those who knew him as a person. This might sound at first as a eulogy but please bear in mind I don't know him personally or even remotely as a science fiction writer. All I know is that he is a thought that outlives the physical form of energy which we all undergo like it or not. Seriously, what does the above public announcement is saying is also a thought for no one really dies except as a living breathing form in transition from that assumed form of energy to a non-breathing/living form so to speak. Brain cells die daily but we are not our brain cells. We are thoughts. Terry From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 20 04:07:48 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:07:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:49 PM, John Grigg wrote: > Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Australoid... Do we still need these > divisions? Are we not ultimately just one race, the human race, Homo > Sapiens Sapiens? > > Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent alien race > for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? I'd be pleased if people would get better at acknowledging differences: Race (to the extent it matters, for example in terms of susceptibility or predisposition to certain disease, cultural incongruities,...), gender, intelligence, physical strength, athletic ability, musical talent... without the category confusion of mapping these onto some kind of statement about the value "in general" of the individual. I am soooo tired of the rehashing of old issues. Apologies to the list -- I know these issues are still active -- but there's so much more to explore together. - Jef From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 05:27:44 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:27:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47E1F5D0.7030205@kevinfreels.com> John Grigg wrote: > Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Australoid... Do we still need > these divisions? Are we not ultimately just one race, the human race, > Homo Sapiens Sapiens? I understand what you are saying. But the divisions exist. They are useful in the anthropology fields when trying to determine the various paths our ancestors took on the road to becoming us. A lot of focus is spent on trying to show just how alike we all are - which is true. Often you will find a "caucasoid" who shares more genes with a "Mongoloid" or "Negroid" than they share with other "caucasoids". And yes, it's terrible that others spend a lot of time trying to find differences and using them to justify treating people differently. We are all unique and we all have similarities. But to pretend, as you suggest, that these differences don't exist at all is just as foolish as pretending that they matter. There are real differences in people - and those differences tell a lot about a person's genetic history. But it also causes people to focus on things they can "see" and ignore the things they can't. This leads to stereotyping which I think is a hard-wired defense mechanism. What really needs to happen is that people should be educated to understand that yes - people are different...and that's OK rather than teaching people that we're all alike. > > Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent alien > race for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? > > > John Grigg > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 05:30:48 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:30:48 -0600 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll make it a personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he mentioned and even his dog. :-) citta437 at aol.com wrote: > "Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > The following is a public service announcement: > PLEASE STOP DYING > _________________________ > > Arthur Clarke is a thought that lives on as memory imprinted on the > minds of those who knew him as a person. This might sound at first as a > eulogy but please bear in mind I don't know him personally or even > remotely as a science fiction writer. > > All I know is that he is a thought that outlives the physical form of > energy which we all undergo like it or not. > > Seriously, what does the above public announcement is saying is also a > thought for no one really dies except as a living breathing form in > transition from that assumed form of energy to a non-breathing/living > form so to speak. > > Brain cells die daily but we are not our brain cells. We are thoughts. > > Terry > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 05:09:41 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:09:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <200803200009.41046.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 20 March 2008, Kevin Freels wrote: > I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even > hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from > suspension, we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his > information state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll > make it a personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those > others he mentioned and even his dog. :-) Go steal his body and donate it to Alcor. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Mar 20 06:59:06 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Race Biology (was Larks vs Night Owls) In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <617982.5812.qm@web65402.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> My last post on the subject, Jef. :) --- Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > ### Assholes will always find a reason to hate an outgroup. This is > completely irrelevant to the biological question of whether you can > divide > humans into large groups related by descent. > You can, Rafal. But when you look at the data with unclouded eyes, or barring that, have a computer running a bayesian clustering algorithm do it for you, you see that that those groups have little to do with the commonly accepted notion of race. When you do, according to these guys who have done it, you end up with groups but they have nothing to do with commonly accepted notions of race: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v29/n3/full/ng761.html Unless there is a race wherin you would lump Ethiopians, Norweigens, Ashkenazi Jews, and Armenians. I don't think "black" or "white" quite cuts the mustard here. Asians likewise aren't a "race". Of course they excluded a whole lot of cultures from their experiment such as latinos and pacific islanders. You want to have medically relevant genetic races, don't cop out with the "Sons of Noah" crap. > > ### I really despise the idea that somebody would denounce and > suppress > life-saving research, if that research acknowledges the biological > reality > of race. The biological reality is very different from the racist fantasy. That's all I am saying. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 09:05:22 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:05:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 6:30 AM, Kevin Freels wrote: > I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even > hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, > we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information > state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll make it a > personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he > mentioned and even his dog. :-) universalimmortalism.org Though I am not _sure_ of this, I really hope so. G. From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Mar 20 09:47:03 2008 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 02:47:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 6:30 AM, Kevin Freels wrote: > >> I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even >> hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, >> we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information >> state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll make it a >> personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he >> mentioned and even his dog. :-) >> > > universalimmortalism.org > > Though I am not _sure_ of this, I really hope so. > And then what? You have reached back from the far highly capable future and plucked someone out of his time. He is now in a world utterly incomprehensible to most all of his assumptions and most of his knowledge. A world where all that he cared about is very ancient and not very interesting history. Are you sure any but the extremely rare individual would thank you or be able to cope? Even those individuals would require a tremendous amount of new knowledge and tools really quickly. If you just implanted all that right now would the result more than superficially be the original person? - samantha > G. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Mar 20 09:59:49 2008 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 02:59:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <47E23595.2080305@mac.com> Kevin Freels wrote: > I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even > hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, > we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information > state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. You must be speaking very loosely as you have no way to be sure of what is and is not possible in this regard consistent with whatever turn out to be inviolate laws of physics. Thus this is no better than any other resurrection mythological belief wheeled out to give some (very thin when you examine it) comfort to the bereaved. Methinks we will take ending aging and mandatory death much more seriously when we stop coming up with such myths and beliefs. > I'll make it a > personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he > mentioned and even his dog. :-) > > How generous to claim you will make a personal goal when you are an indefinitely long lived transhuman to do something that attracts you in your admittedly besotted and very unaware pre-transhuman babyhood. Do you honestly believe you are making a real commitment that you will be bound by for your indefinitely long lived future? From artillo at comcast.net Thu Mar 20 12:45:16 2008 From: artillo at comcast.net (artillo at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:45:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? Message-ID: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "John Grigg" > Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Australoid... Do we still need these > divisions? Are we not ultimately just one race, the human race, Homo > Sapiens Sapiens? > > Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent alien race > for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? > > > John Grigg That's how I always look at the world, unfortunately most people for some reason or other can't seem to get past cosmetic differences. "We all bleed red" is what I often say. People will always look for ways to differentiate themselves from others that are not "like us". My mother used to make fun of me when I would fill out forms where you indicate "race", because I would often check "Other". She just didn't get my logic. Race isn't the same thing as ethnicity and somehow they are always confused with each other. I'm not Caucasian because I wasn't born in the Caucasus mountain region. I'm not from a Hispanic land, I'm not of Asian descent, I'm not black (does anyone know ANYONE who is actually the color "black" anyway?) I am, ethnically speaking, AMERICAN. I mean it's just an exercise in futility and divisiveness that doesn't need to be. And then theres this thing that is the height of political correctness, when we say things like African-American, Asian-American etc. If on that form existed a checkbox that said "Native American" I would check it, because I was born in America, therefore logically making me a native of that land. But noooo instead they put on there "American Indian or Alaskan Native", which if I was of American Tribal descent, would offend me because Indians are from INDIA. But I digress. I even had an arguement with a former co-worker one day because he was thoroughly convinced that "Jewish" was one of the races, and that it was even somehow encoded in the Jewish person's DNA! As laughable as that sounds, he was insistent that he was correct, even though I pointed out that there are Jews of virtually every skin color or national origin. Plus the fact that we don't consider "Christian" or "Muslim" to be yet another misguided racial tag, he just refused to admit his faulty logic. I am convinced there are a lot of people like this out there, which is a real shame, and hopefully someone (like perhaps Obama) will step up and enlighten these types of people and help us make real progress towards a truly unified Human Race. I for one welcome with open arms any alien race that's crazy enough to contact us! Otherwise, have a great day everyone!!!! Happy Spring Equinox! -Artillo (wow do I lurk a lot or what LOL) RIP Arthur C. Clarke, you are stardust, you are eternal. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "John Grigg" Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:50:44 +0000 Size: 1983 URL: From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 13:26:48 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:26:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race is arbitrary {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA58A52F359176-210-4E6@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Race is arbitrary, relative and temporary used by society and individuals for convenience in communication, research and political reasons. The issue arise when it is used to be an absolute/permanent and universal truth. Genes mutate and humans change in the time. Evolutionary biologists and anthropologists depend on the variety of races for study in their respective disciplines. Scientific theories are not permanent truths but working hypothesis for the time being. We do not see thoughts of race or abstract ideas as movements of the mind/brain. MRI showed brains are impacted by emotions or what is going in the structure of the brain during periods of stress. One who clings to the idea of race superiority or whatever feels stressful when he/she is challenged. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 13:53:02 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:53:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Arthur Clarke dies Message-ID: <8CA58A8D962F138-210-61D@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> "On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote: > Friends don't let friends die. Note how sick people are: they say no to the attempted suicide of a friend, but are okay with death in general. What's up with this? - Bryan _____________ Imho, both of the above statements are mistakes in thinking. Thoughts of friends may fade and die and some are reborn as the nature of thoughts are just temporary. Sickness are manifestations of genetic behavior when it cause suffering/psychological distress. Suicide of a friend cause us pain and suffering but in time the pain diminishes. The thought of death in general cause fear because we thought of the selves as permanent beings not processes of thoughts. Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 14:23:41 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:23:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <47E23595.2080305@mac.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <47E23595.2080305@mac.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803200723m391c1494jb6db32f36a89cf5@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Kevin Freels wrote: > > I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even > > hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, > > we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information > > state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. > You must be speaking very loosely as you have no way to be sure of what > is and is not possible in this regard consistent with whatever turn out > to be inviolate laws of physics. Thus this is no better than any other > resurrection mythological belief wheeled out to give some (very thin > when you examine it) comfort to the bereaved. Methinks we will take > ending aging and mandatory death much more seriously when we stop coming > up with such myths and beliefs. > > > > I'll make it a > > personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he > > mentioned and even his dog. :-) > > > > > How generous to claim you will make a personal goal when you are an > indefinitely long lived transhuman to do something that attracts you in > your admittedly besotted and very unaware pre-transhuman babyhood. Do > you honestly believe you are making a real commitment that you will be > bound by for your indefinitely long lived future? > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 14:29:45 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:29:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803200723m391c1494jb6db32f36a89cf5@mail.gmail.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <47E23595.2080305@mac.com> <2d6187670803200723m391c1494jb6db32f36a89cf5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803200729w58fffab2m68f9a1dc3eb42547@mail.gmail.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: How generous to claim you will make a personal goal when you are an indefinitely long lived transhuman to do something that attracts you in your admittedly besotted and very unaware pre-transhuman babyhood. Do you honestly believe you are making a real commitment that you will be bound by for your indefinitely long lived future? >>>> And whether he remembers his commitment or not, the Department of Temporal Intervention will arrest him for illegally scooping someone out of their native time period. It's that darn "Time and Space Protection Act," which was passed into law way back in 2317! John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 14:44:21 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:44:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryogenics Faith or a Belief? {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA58B004C4BA06-210-8EE@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> First let me suggest a review of a book related to the issue of skin color: "Human Primates The Third Chimpanzee, by Dr. Jared Diamond [Among the top 10 books I've ever read] This is Dr. Diamond's attempt to explain to his two boys how humans and chimps can be so different when the DNA is not (98.4% identical). The second half of his book gets pretty technical and you'd have to really be curious to make it through -- but it is worth it. He hints that Mediterranean climate is why European-type primates have historically dominated so much of the globe, without being really any different that any of the other human primates. This important theme, which makes skin color look ridiculous as a way of judging another person, is explained in his Guns, Germs and Steel. Reading Third Chimpanzee, you'll feel like you're in college -- that's a warning, or a recommendation, depending on how you look at it, but it maybe one of the best courses you ever took! " ____________________ Majority of beliefs on superiority of one race over another cause conflicts due to ignorance or innate tendency to survive in the changing environment. Some sociologists fear that global warming is one of the factors why immigration to European countries are on the rise. The changes in climate that cause drought cause the migration of primates from one place to another to look for food. In turn these events cause the domino effect leading to the present conflict/ wars between the affluent and less affluent nations. The mixture of race and skin color pales in comparison to a much larger conflict that can lead to the extinction of the human race. The probability of this happening is high and imho cryogenics is a belief akin to a religious belief if we cling to it as the only solution to the preservation of the human race. Technologists who focus on creating the process of cryogenics may overlook what is needed right here and now. We explored the cosmos but we have'nt controlled the weather. We barely touch the tip of the ice berg so to speak when it comes to understanding the processes of nature such as: 1. Consciousness 2. Mutating virus causing epidemics 3. Emotional vs. Rational behavior Terry From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 16:11:09 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:11:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Some countries {Holland} legalize prostitution according to the recent travel documentary. Majority of marriage is a form of legalized prostitution not unlike a business transaction here in the US and even in the so called Christian nations. Fundamentalists want to legislate morality to prevent legalized prostitution here in the US. Perceptions of morality belongs to closed minded individuals who are driven by desires for power or fortune. Governmental institution develop laws in the interests of society in general. Why do some countries like Holland legalize prostitution and the US does not? Is it due to the dominance of atheists in that country as opposed to the majority of theistic beliefs? Atheistic belief if you can call it that is amoral, neither moral or immoral. If morality depends on the perception or desire of the majority of the population here in the US then atheism is immoral. No atheist has yet been elected president as far as I know in the history of the US. Presidential candidates still cater to the majority to win the white house. Those who believed in evolution are still in the minority and the majority would elect those they expect won't legalize prostitution. Terry From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 16:48:00 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:48:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <20080320094800.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.4c2e87ecfb.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 17:26:12 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:26:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryogenics Faith or a Belief? {Terry} In-Reply-To: <8CA58B004C4BA06-210-8EE@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA58B004C4BA06-210-8EE@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803201026i1da76098w328591a8cad8e5ad@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: Majority of beliefs on superiority of one race over another cause conflicts due to ignorance or innate tendency to survive in the changing environment. Some sociologists fear that global warming is one of the factors why immigration to European countries are on the rise. The changes in climate that cause drought cause the migration of primates from one place to another to look for food. In turn these events cause the domino effect leading to the present conflict/ wars between the affluent and less affluent nations. >>> Yes, a big reason we need to get a grip on global warning before it spins out of control is because war will blossom between resource hungry major powers who will be desperate to keep their economies going. And in this scenario we will also see a massive refugee problem. you continue: The mixture of race and skin color pales in comparison to a much larger conflict that can lead to the extinction of the human race. The probability of this happening is high and imho cryogenics is a belief akin to a religious belief if we cling to it as the only solution to the preservation of the human race. >>> Cryonics as a solution for the need to preserve the human race in case of impending extinction? LOL Where did you get that idea? Cryonics as it is practiced today (and in the near future) will not be as an escape vehicle for humanity! It takes a decent social and economic infrastructure to support a cryonics facility. Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen as competing with it. you continue: Technologists who focus on creating the process of cryogenics may overlook what is needed right here and now. We explored the cosmos but we have'nt controlled the weather. We barely touch the tip of the ice berg so to speak when it comes to understanding the processes of nature such as: 1. Consciousness 2. Mutating virus causing epidemics 3. Emotional vs. Rational behavior >>> Terry, the researchers who are trying to improve cryonics are just a *tiny/microscopic* drop in the bucket of the technologists who are out there doing various kinds of work. Please don't put a guilt trip on them for not mastering weather control! LOL A handful of scientists with rather limited funds have worked very hard to get cryonics where it is now (and it still has a long ways to go). American and global basic science research will be making rapid strides over the coming several decades in the three areas you listed. John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 17:05:16 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:05:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <20080320100516.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.9cfda9b324.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 17:55:20 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:55:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} In-Reply-To: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803201055j32a73925v4badb44eb1579559@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: Majority of marriage is a form of legalized prostitution not unlike a business transaction here in the US and even in the so called Christian nations. Fundamentalists want to legislate morality to prevent legalized prostitution here in the US. >>> Terry, I think you have a very warped view of marriage. Many marriages are based on love, chemistry and natural affection, with money only being one part of it. And so generally married women should *not* be compared to prostitutes. Regarding legalized prostitution, the U.S. does have it (but it is very unusual here). you continue: Perceptions of morality belongs to closed minded individuals who are driven by desires for power or fortune. >>> This often is true. Governor Spitzer is probably an example of this. you continue: Governmental institution develop laws in the interests of society in general. Why do some countries like Holland legalize prostitution and the US does not? Is it due to the dominance of atheists in that country as opposed to the majority of theistic beliefs? >>> I would agree. But even Theists in Holland are probably looser in their view of what public morality should be based on their religious beliefs. I do believe that prostitution, even under "ideal" circumstances, does generally psychologically brutalize women. But the big concern currently must be on modern slavery/kidnapping and how it causes women to be forced into this life. you continue: Atheistic belief if you can call it that is amoral, neither moral or immoral. If morality depends on the perception or desire of the majority of the population here in the US then atheism is immoral. No atheist has yet been elected president as far as I know in the history of the US. Presidential candidates still cater to the majority to win the white house. Those who believed in evolution are still in the minority and the majority would elect those they expect won't legalize prostitution. >>> I am amazed the U.S. has not yet had a Black or female president. But that will probably be changing soon (even if not with this election). As for a winning candidate who is openly an atheist and vouches for evolution, AND who wants to legalize prostitution..., well it's going to be a long time in coming! lol I would say mid 21st century (yes, that far away, leaving out a Singularity). And when it comes to a openly gay, openly atheist, openly pro-evolution, openly pro-prostitution, openly Libertarian Party, lol, openly pro-gun control, and openly pro-defense budget limitations..., well..., maybe there is an alternate Earth dimension where such a candidate was elected president. ; ) John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 18:01:11 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 11:01:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur In-Reply-To: <20080320100516.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.9cfda9b324.wbe@email.secureserver.net> References: <20080320100516.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.9cfda9b324.wbe@email.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <2d6187670803201101m36030b7bt93348cb286685fb9@mail.gmail.com> I, John Grigg, did not write what Kevin Freels attributed to me. Please see below: >>> John Grigg wrote: You must be speaking very loosely as you have no way to be sure of what is and is not possible in this regard consistent with whatever turn out to be inviolate laws of physics. Thus this is no better than any other resurrection mythological belief wheeled out to give some (very thin when you examine it) comfort to the bereaved. Methinks we will take ending aging and mandatory death much more seriously when we stop coming up with such myths and beliefs. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 17:34:35 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:34:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryogenics Faith or a Belief? {Terry} Message-ID: <20080320103435.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.f7094b1ecb.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin at kevinfreels.com Thu Mar 20 19:40:49 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:40:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <20080320124049.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.c6a480b72e.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 20 21:11:38 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:11:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution Message-ID: <8CA58E61F1ECF05-C84-25C1@webmail-nc03.sysops.aol.com> John wrote: "Terry, I think you have a very warped view of marriage. Many marriages are based on love, chemistry and natural affection, with money only being one part of it. And so generally married women should *not* be compared to prostitutes. Regarding legalized prostitution, the U.S. does have it (but it is very unusual here)." _____________________ I don't know of any state that legalized prostitution here in the U.S. I did not say that married women in general are prostituting themselves when they marry for money or prestige. I don't know the statistics but men do marry for the same reason. You said many marriages are based on love? Love of self or love of fantasy? How many live in common-law marriage for the sake of common interests or for protection of their children? Humans are not monogamous by nature. Some society consider serial marriage the norm. I consider that a modified legalized prostitution. Terry Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 21:41:37 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:41:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution In-Reply-To: <8CA58E61F1ECF05-C84-25C1@webmail-nc03.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA58E61F1ECF05-C84-25C1@webmail-nc03.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803201441j8670a5dla631dd5ba830faa1@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: I don't know of any state that legalized prostitution here in the U.S. >>> I believe that only in small sections of Nevada is it legal. you continue: I did not say that married women in general are prostituting themselves when they marry for money or prestige. I don't know the statistics but men do marry for the same reason. >>> And as more and more women become extremely successful we shall see more of that. you wrote: You said many marriages are based on love? Love of self or love of fantasy? How many live in common-law marriage for the sake of common interests or for protection of their children? >>> I don't know the official statistics of happy and loving marriages within the West ( I realize roughly half of all marriages ultimately don't make it). But there still are many happy marriages out there and please remember, you must first love yourself before you can love another. The big transition within a marriage is when the "fantasy/idealized" image of their partner at least partially fades in the bright light of imperfect reality, and yet they can still deeply love that person, anyway. And yes, many couples stay together for the sake of the children, which is definitely not always a good idea. Kids can pick up on the fact that mom and dad are just not happy with each other (even when the parents think this is a well-kept secret). you continue: Humans are not monogamous by nature. Some society consider serial marriage the norm. I consider that a modified legalized prostitution. >>> I personally think some humans are very prone toward monogamy but others are by nature at the other end of the spectrum. Serial marriage has definitely become popular in the West, especially among the more successful. I once read the view of an anthropologist that serial marriage among the relatively wealthy was a new twist on polygamy (he gave celebrity Johnny Carson as his classic example). He said this was so because a wealthy/young/sometimes older man could monopolize many of the "best years/prime fertility years" of a young and beautiful woman. And because of their success they could later keep repeating the process with other women as their current relatinships failed. During his lifetime this male has kept these females away from other less successful males who might have had children with them (and the successful male might either have no children with these women or less than they would have had with another younger but less successful male). I find this an interesting theory to say the least. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 21:54:20 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:54:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <25f801c88a1e$0aac86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319174304.023689c8@satx.rr.com> <25f801c88a1e$0aac86f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803201454s17641a3bxb5fa957196a272d1@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > Damien, I also strongly suspect that Rafal "got it" too. ### I wasn't quite sure what I was getting....but I did have an inkling :) Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From shannonvyff at yahoo.com Thu Mar 20 21:35:48 2008 From: shannonvyff at yahoo.com (Shannon) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:35:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 33 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <500414.68907.qm@web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The Time Travel Funds accepts the 10 dollar time travel ticket fee for donated individuals--their rules are here: (For those wanting various ideas of how to save Arthur C. Clark) Our family are Alcor members, but for 10 dollars a person, this is a good 'slight chance' backup as well ;-) : http://www.timetravelfund.com/ Health, Happiness, Wisdom & Longevity :-) -- best wishes from... Austin, Texas --Shannon Vyff (512) 673-3431 2011 Lantana Drive, Round Rock, TX, 78664 "21st Century Kids" http://www.amazon.com/21st-Century-Kids-Shannon-Vyff/dp/1886057001 From stathisp at gmail.com Thu Mar 20 23:28:52 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:28:52 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803201055j32a73925v4badb44eb1579559@mail.gmail.com> References: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> <2d6187670803201055j32a73925v4badb44eb1579559@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 21/03/2008, John Grigg wrote: > I am amazed the U.S. has not yet had a Black or female president. But that > will probably be changing soon (even if not with this election). As for a > winning candidate who is openly an atheist and vouches for evolution... Do US politicians not believe in evolution? I thought that even in the US that is a minority position, especially among those with a University education. Even the Pope believes in evolution! -- Stathis Papaioannou From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 20 23:49:32 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:49:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Lest We Do Harm (was Race Biology) References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080318224317.02375ed0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <265001c88ae5$61d2fbe0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > Since we know the evil consequences of easily making such > "racial" linkages, there are sound motives to walk very carefully > in using such shortcuts when they are really superficial or due to > accidents of culture and political choice. But how are we to know beforehand that they're superficial? That's what is being debated, after all. If you are a quite exceptional human being---but not a politician, famous pundit, or policy maker, then what you believe and what you say do not really relate to the health of society[1]. It's a fallacy to think otherwise, perhaps related to the "illusion of central position". I am here on Extropians to know and speak the truth, to have my ideas criticized, and in exchange to criticize the ideas of others, all in accordance with the tenets of PCR (Pan Critical Rationalism). We here, therefore, have no need here to "walk softly" near dangerous ideas. I'll try to say what is true, regardless of the puny effects my words have on "society", and I think others here ought to do likewise. As Kuromaku mentioned to me offlist, any efforts to deny reality tend in the long run to cause more harm than good anyway. Lee [1] But if you are a very *typical* individual in most ways, and have a very conventional outlook about societal issues, then what you think does matter, because there are a lot of people who think exactly the same way you do. In this case, it may even make logical sense to vote. From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 20 23:58:40 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:58:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? In-Reply-To: References: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> <2d6187670803201055j32a73925v4badb44eb1579559@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080320185447.02457e20@satx.rr.com> At 10:28 AM 3/21/2008 +1100, Stathis wrote: >Do US politicians not believe in evolution? I thought that even in the >US that is a minority position, Most of the polls I've read suggest >50% USians against evolution. Such polls might be crap, of course, if they're made by phoning random people and selectively getting answers from the crazed, the out of work, the uneducated who are eager for distraction, etc. I've always hung up on them myself. >especially among those with a >University education. <50% but still terrifyingly high. And whether they *believe* isn't the point; they have to watch what they say in case the idiots vote against them as tools of Satan. Damien Broderick From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 00:03:25 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:03:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <8CA58FE1E68AEED-1320-12A8@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> Someone wrote: "> universalimmortalism.org > > Though I am not _sure_ of this, I really hope so. > Samantha: "And then what? You have reached back from the far highly capable future and plucked someone out of his time. He is now in a world utterly incomprehensible to most all of his assumptions and most of his knowledge. A world where all that he cared about is very ancient and not very interesting history. Are you sure any but the extremely rare individual would thank you or be able to cope? Even those individuals would require a tremendous amount of new knowledge and tools really quickly. If you just implanted all that right now would the result more than superficially be the original person?" Hi, Samantha, this actually what happened when one is in delusion/mistaking thought as reality. Delusions of persecution in psychological terms is an escape of a narcissistic ego. The narcissist suffers when his/her desires are not met with satisfactory results. Emotionally challenged individuals cling to memories/thoughts and need intensive psychiatric evaluation to taylor the proper treatment as early as possible before the brain's coping capabilities further decline into major depression as in post-traumatic injuries. Terry From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 21 01:56:40 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:56:40 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: >I am sad, very very sad. Yep. me too. There's a special group of people in Boulder this week, and tonight, 5-10 of us went to the nearest pub and talked about Pluto and national space agencies and science fiction and ... Sir Arthur. Everyone around the table knew the details of every scene in 2001, for example, with several explaining more details that they learned from interviews with Kubrick and Clarke. I can't tell you how wrong it is for me to be watching and hearing (and learning) of the detailed planning for the Pluto flyby in July 2015, knowing that Arthur C. Clarke is gone. Space missions and ACC should never be separated. Never. But now they are. But today is also the first day of Spring. I made my first presentation to the team with my first (excellent :-) ) results, and the rest of my life is cruising on overdrive, with my biggest plans exactly on track. So this year will be the best year, ever. We salute you, Sir Arthur; you will always be with us in memory. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From kevin at kevinfreels.com Fri Mar 21 02:16:45 2008 From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevin at kevinfreels.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:16:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur Message-ID: <20080320191645.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.42da3f239d.wbe@email.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 02:20:54 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:20:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics or Genetic Engineering?{Terry} Message-ID: <8CA59115369AE0D-1320-17B2@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> John Grigg wrote:"Cryonics as a solution for the need to preserve the human race in case of impending extinction? LOL Where did you get that idea? Cryonics as it is practiced today (and in the near future) will not be as an escape vehicle for humanity! It takes a decent social and economic infrastructure to support a cryonics facility. Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen as competing with it." _______________ Hi, John, we are gene machines/gene carriers. The structure of the gene is to replicate itself and this process is aided by culture the ability of humans to device a scientific tool, genetic engineering. If cryonic is a scientific tool why did the scientific community use it to produce the desired result? Genetic engineering is growing in leaps and bounds and cryonics are nowhere near that. Do tell what have the cryonic technology accomplished so far? Terry From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 02:31:54 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:31:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics or Genetic Engineering?{Terry} Message-ID: <8CA5912DCB28F2D-1320-1823@webmail-me13.sysops.aol.com> "John Grigg wrote:"Cryonics as a solution for the need to preserve the human race in case of impending extinction? LOL Where did you get that idea? Cryonics as it is practiced today (and in the near future) will not be as an escape vehicle for humanity! It takes a decent social and economic infrastructure to support a cryonics facility. Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen as competing with it." _______________ Hi, John, we are gene machines/gene carriers. The structure of the gene is to replicate itself and this process is aided by culture the ability of humans to device a scientific tool, genetic engineering. If cryonic is a scientific tool how did the scientific community use it to produce the desired result? Genetic engineering is growing in leaps and bounds and cryonics are nowhere near that. Do tell what have the cryonic technology accomplished so far? Terry From brent.allsop at comcast.net Fri Mar 21 03:07:11 2008 From: brent.allsop at comcast.net (Brent Allsop) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:07:11 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080320185447.02457e20@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58BC24C39FF0-210-F8F@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> <2d6187670803201055j32a73925v4badb44eb1579559@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080320185447.02457e20@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <47E3265F.9070407@comcast.net> I certainly agree the things like prostitution should not be illegal. Wouldn't it be great to have some quantitative measures about this kind of stuff? At least about how all of us feel about it and why? I think we should do much more than just talk about this. I've created a topic in the canonizer on this here: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/60 I think it'd sure be great if we could get some great reasons started for why such being legal is by far the most moral position, and some real people explicitly stating their beliefs about such. Brent Allsop Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:28 AM 3/21/2008 +1100, Stathis wrote: > > >> Do US politicians not believe in evolution? I thought that even in the >> US that is a minority position, >> > > Most of the polls I've read suggest >50% USians against evolution. > Such polls might be crap, of course, if they're made by phoning > random people and selectively getting answers from the crazed, the > out of work, the uneducated who are eager for distraction, etc. I've > always hung up on them myself. > > >> especially among those with a >> University education. >> > > <50% but still terrifyingly high. And whether they *believe* isn't > the point; they have to watch what they say in case the idiots vote > against them as tools of Satan. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 04:01:49 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:01:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? References: <2d6187670803192049n6602e7dck9a835469bcb314dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John wrote > Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent alien race > for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? No, no meeting with aliens is required at all. We already look at other mammals even on our own planet askance, as if they weren't fully human. In fact, they're often treated as if, well, as if they were animals. :-) Lee From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 21 02:49:38 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:49:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Crow and Kitten are Friends Message-ID: A different take on appreciating others despite differences. - Jef From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 04:48:13 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:48:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yet More Bad News for Scientology Message-ID: <26db01c88b0e$ccddcc70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Take a look at http://www.radaronline.com/from-the-magazine/2008/03/scientology_anonymous_protests_tom_cruise_01.php Evidently we have an "unorganization" that came out of the woodwork with much the same proportion of the population as we and the transhumanists make up. There are at least a hundred news stories since (if google is to be believed) since January 15, but these one and the one below are worth reading for those not aware of the topic. Also, there was, briefly, this: "The clumsy attempt at censorship angered many on the Web, including the Manhattan media site Gawker, which obtained its own copy and continues to host the video despite the threat of a lawsuit. At press time, the footage had been viewed more than 2.7 million times. "Then came Anonymous. On January 21, a video titled "Message to Scientology" appeared on YouTube. A brilliant work of agitprop, the video (embedded below) features a monotone, computer-generated voice speaking in staccato against a mesmerizing backdrop of gathering clouds. The message, which bears quoting at length, is ominous: "Hello, Scientology. We are Anonymous. Over the years, we have been watching you. Your campaigns of misinformation, suppression of dissent, your litigious nature: All of these things have caught our eye. With the leakage of your latest propaganda video into mainstream circulation, the extent of your malign influence over those who have come to trust you has been made clear to us. Anonymous has therefore decided that your organization should be destroyed. ... We are Anonymous. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us." (As some of you know, our resident expert on this subject is gagged by his probation terms, and so I don't think he can comment.) But see also this. It's really good! http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0811,ortega,357974,2.html How "Anonymous" Has Changed the Game of Exposing Scientology's Ruthless Global Scam by Tony Ortega March 11th, 2008 12:11 AM L. Ron Hubbard, the pulp fiction writer who gave the world Battlefield Earth, as well as a nuisance known as Scientology, would have turned 97 years old this Thursday, March 13. Ron's been worm food for more than a score of years now, so it probably won't matter to him that the best birthday party being held in his name will take place a couple of days late. On Saturday, March 15, the surprisingly upstart, leaderless movement known as "Anonymous" will be holding its second worldwide anti-Scientology protests at Hubbard sites in more than a dozen countries. The grassroots, Internet-based group seemed to materialize out of thin air just a few weeks ago, and it's difficult to tell whether the surprising success of its February 10 rallies-which were held from Oslo to Sydney-will spark even more rallies beyond this weekend. The February protests featured a lot of twentysomethings, for the most part, carrying anti-Scientology signs, and wearing masks to protect their anonymity (Guy Fawkes masks were popular) in places like New York, Boston, London, and Toronto. This time, they say, they're bringing cake and candles. Anonymous has actually been around for a while, wreaking havoc like a bunch of drunken teenagers on numerous Internet locations since 2006. And at first, it approached Scientology the same way, like reckless hackers and pinheads. But thanks in part to the calm words of someone I used to write about when I covered Scientology in Los Angeles, Mark Bunker (now known as 'Wise Beard Man' to the protesters), Anonymous quickly grew up and started taking a more Gandhi-inspired approach to opposing Hubbard's weird cult. This recent targeting of Scientology sprung up after several years of the worst press Hubbard's followers had ever endured. From the time Tom Cruise appeared to lose his mind leaping all over Oprah Winfrey's couch in 2005, to his knockout nine-minute video not meant for public consumption that appeared in January, Cruise and Scientology have been reeling from one PR disaster to the next. And now it seems as if everybody and his brother is writing about Scientology, ridiculing Hubbard, making fun of "Xenu" and "e-meters" and "going clear," and laughing at John Travolta and Kirstie Alley and Leah Rimini and Cruise. A decade ago, I hardly would have believed it. Not that I'm complaining. I much prefer it this way. Back then, I was one of a small number of journalists who tried to communicate to the larger public what was alarming and nonsensical and simply inane about Scientology and its status as a "church." Other, braver, journalists had been doing the same for decades. There was Paulette Cooper, for example, who occasionally sent me encouraging e-mails when my stories came out, and who had suffered like no other (you can look it up). I'm not claiming that my colleagues and I did the kind of pioneering research that Paulette and others did in the 1970s and 1980s. But still, just ten years ago, it was a very different environment. Even then, you didn't look into the secrets of the church without having at least some second thoughts about what it might mean to take on Hubbard's dim minions. But it felt worthwhile. When you got past the typical American reluctance to criticize or even discuss the particulars of another's religion, listeners at cocktail parties would be mesmerized to hear that only 10 percent of Scientology's adherents, for example, have been let in on the church's origin story. As I put it in a story back in the day: Imagine the Roman Catholic church withholding the contents of the Book of Genesis from 90 percent of its 900 million worldwide adherents. That's 810 million Catholics kept in the dark about "Let there be light," Adam and Eve, and the rest of the Christian origin saga. And imagine that the Catholic church called Genesis a "trade secret" that could only be revealed to Catholics who had spent years, and hundreds of thousands of dollars, obtaining the correct level of experience to be allowed to read their own religion's version of how the universe started and where people came from. That's what, for me, separated Scientology from the rest, what put the lie to claims (sometimes from mushy-headed religion professors) that Hubbard's was a legitimate "church." What other "religion" wanted $100,000 and several years of dedication before a member learned its most basic beliefs? And Scientology can't afford to be more forthcoming: Who would join if they knew they were going to spend that kind of money (and shun other family members and completely build their lives around Scientology) in order to rid their bodies of invisible space-alien parasites? No wonder such details aren't mentioned during the most basic Scientology come-on, the free "personality test" you get in the subway. So yes, I'm looking forward to this Saturday's shindig for the commodore. Hubbard was an attention whore, so he might not really disapprove. And while I'm counting heads at the local rally, I'll probably feel some nostalgia for an earlier time, when there were much fewer of us trying to get at the truth. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Back in 1999 I was working for a newspaper in Los Angeles that no longer exists. Scientology was a wonderful subject for an eager reporter: It was nefarious as hell, operating more like the mafia than a religion, and at the same time breathtakingly stupid: Besides its core beliefs about a galactic overlord and disembodied aliens inhabiting the human body, adherents are convinced that Ron's talking cure will lead them to become clairvoyants able to leave their bodies at will, which, as Cruise pointed out, makes them excellent first responders to auto accidents. And believe me, there's far weirder stuff that was committed to paper by a burnt-out, pill-popping pulp fiction writer with a messiah complex named Lafayette Ronald Hubbard, who had demanded that his followers sign billion-year contracts so that they'd continue to serve him lifetime after lifetime (Hubbard's own lifetime ended in 1986). Wading into this stuff was too much fun. And at that time, my New Times Los Angeles colleague Ron Russell and I had little competition. Scientology was centered in Los Angeles (its other headquarters is in Florida), but after the Los Angeles Times had done a major, multi-part expos? in 1989, the paper had given up covering the cult almost completely. Other publications were aware that after Time magazine took its own shot in 1990, calling Scientology a "ruthless global scam," the church had filed a libel lawsuit asking for hundreds of millions of dollars, and nine years later the case was still unresolved (it was ultimately dismissed). With the Time suit still pending, most publications were wary of Scientology's litigious reputation. Other than Richard Leiby, a Washington Post reporter who was doing excellent work, Russell and I practically had the Scientology investigative field to ourselves for a few years. Russell, for example, wrote a mind-blowing piece about how Scientology officials took advantage of a brain-damaged man, convincing the poor sucker to invest some of the millions he'd received for his injury in a non-existent ostrich-egg business. (I shit you not.) My favorite experience was writing about a woman named Tory Christman (Tory Bezazian then), a 30-year Scientologist who had rather spectacularly defected from the church in the middle of a Usenet slugfest after secretly reaching out to one of the cult's biggest detractors, the operator of Xenu.net. That story, "Sympathy for the Devil," lives on in cyberspace, even though the newspaper I wrote it for no longer does. In another story, we put the lie to the church's claim that it no longer practices "fair game"-L. Ron's famous edict that his troops should engage in dirty tricks to bury its perceived enemies. In "Double Crossed," we detailed one of the most hellacious cases of fair game in recent years, the smearing of attorney Graham Berry with the use of a coerced, false affidavit claiming that Berry was a pederast who went after boys as young as 12. When the man who made that false affidavit, Robert Cipriano, was sued by Berry in a defamation suit, the church, in order to keep him from recanting his false claims, offered to represent him in the lawsuit for free, donated thousands to Cipriano's nonprofit projects, and even got him a house, a car, and a job at Earthlink (which had been founded by Scientologists). You can see the story here. Berry's experience, as well as that of others (Google "Keith Henson," kids), made it plain that if you opposed Scientology, you had to be very careful not to give the church a way to claim victim status. Which is exactly what Anonymous didn't do. After the Cruise video, meant only for other delusional Scientologists and not the rest of the world, showed up in January on the Internet, the church went into attack mode, trying to shut down every copy. (Gawker's Nick Denton has done the world a service by keeping the video up and flipping Scientology the bird. See it here.) That in turn inspired Anonymous, which has a thing about Internet censorship. But the nameless group of geeks initially took a hacker's approach, hitting Scientology sites with various tactics to shut them down. For longtime critics like Mark Bunker, it was a nightmare. So he took to YouTube with a video of himself, explaining in a sort of open letter that Anonymous was ruining the work that he and others have been doing for decades. By pranking and vandalizing Scientology sites, Anonymous was only giving the church the ability to claim that it was being victimized. The moral high ground, in other words, had been lost. Bunker's simple video-a bearded older guy sitting in front of his computer and talking into a web cam-seemed to have a major effect, resulting in the peaceful protests of February 10. Will the Anonymous phenomenon continue to grow? And how, given its past, will Anonymous be able to police its own, so that some of its "members" don't revert to reckless antics? Scientology, no doubt, will continue to claim that it's a victim of religious bigots. It always has. But at the least, it's good to see so many people a little more aware of what Hubbardism is all about, even if it means I'll have to come up with something else as cocktail party patter. Hell, everyone seems to know about Xenu by now. Heh, heh, heh. There are now just too many people laying out the dirt on this totally vicious and destructive cult for those nasty people go after all of them. :-) Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 04:51:34 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:51:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> Message-ID: <26e501c88b0f$81674c20$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Kevin writes > I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even > hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, Well, cryonic suspension isn't of much worth after a century or two, according to what I've heard. We better make damn sure that our society continues to grow in wealth and technology. > we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information > state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll make it a > personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he > mentioned and even his dog. :-) Right on! Considered joining the Universal Immortalists? We believe that this is exactly the "common goal" of all humankind, first enunciated by F. N. Federov a century ago. Take a look at the site, http://www.universalimmortalism.org and if, you want to help out, http://www.universalimmortalism.org/join.htm Lee From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Fri Mar 21 04:53:26 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> No, no meeting with aliens is required at all. We already look at other mammals even on our own planet askance, as if they weren't fully human. In fact, they're often treated as if, well, as if they were animals. :-) Lee Well, given some of the attitudes I've come across as of late, if humans did end up meeting intelligent aliens at any point, there would be groups of humans insisting that regardless of the fact that the aliens were perfectly happy the way they were, they ought to be coercively modified on the basis that they "don't know what they're missing" on account of not being human. You know, because it's "compassionate" and all. Blech. Seriously, I fear for any alien species that doesn't appear to act and think on average like your standard neurotypical human -- if I knew of any such species I would advise them to stay the heck away from Earth if they valued their freedom to self-determine at all. - Anne "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 05:04:30 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:04:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > Rafal wrote: > > [Stuart:] >> Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the >> purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and >> other social scientists rather than of biologists. >> >>### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property >>related to common descent. > > Oh, the innocence. Damien, they're discussing the *scientific*, oops, *biological* concept. > Sally Hemings' mother, Betty Hemings, was the daughter of the English > Captain Hemings and a black slave woman brought from Africa > (Wikipedia says), so her kids by Jefferson were three-quarters > "white." That surely made them white, eh? Oh yeah? No, in the U.S. they'd be called black, because that's their relative coloration compared to the rest of the people here. > Obama's mother was a "white" USian from Kansas and his father a > "black" Kenyan, so he's--what? How does the US culture refer to his "race"? If he went to Kenya, they'd probably call him white. After all, compared to the rest of them he would be. > Arbitrarily-chosen phenotypic markers are determined by biology, > obviously; the "race" of Hemings and her children and Barack Obama is > determined by--what? That depends on whether you are more interested in the scientific, more precise biological concept, or the societal one. As far as the biological concept goes, they really were 25% African and 75% white. Now socially, it is not too surprising that it may be a different story. For example, in Brazil there are a lot of well-to-do people that you or I would unhesitatingly refer to as "black", because of the way that we perceive their much darker skin color compared to many other rich and influential people in Latin America, most of whom are white (both culturally and biologically). But those particular well-to-do Brazilians will not simply be faking indignation were you to describe them as black. They'd be truly offended, because in the Brazilian mind, alleged coloration is subtly (to us, anyway) correlated with social status, or wealth, or I don't know what. But any honest geneticist who doesn't have a political axe to grind one way or the other will tell you what proportion of their genes are African dervived, what proportion are indigenous Indian, and what proportion are European. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 05:14:32 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:14:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: The Evils of HTML (was Re: No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur) References: <20080320124049.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.c6a480b72e.wbe@email.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <271f01c88b13$042d0d40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Kevin, I couldn't tell who was saying what either. I would repeat the customary plea for people to not use HTML if at all possible. Try harder to find the settings in your email client, or in a dropdown menu somewhere, or on the web page from where you are posting. Not only that, a lot of people just skip HTML because of the inevitable top-posting, bottom posting, and general confusion attending such posts. Not only that, but it's felt that serious posters---people who want their ideas to be addressed seriously ---will take the pains to avoid HTML. Look below for a perfect example. Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: kevin at kevinfreels.com To: ExI chat list Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur My apologies. The message posted was from you and I did not see that that portion of the message was from Samantha. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur From: "John Grigg" Date: Thu, March 20, 2008 1:01 pm To: "ExI chat list" I, John Grigg, did not write what Kevin Freels attributed to me. Please see below: >>> John Grigg wrote: You must be speaking very loosely as you have no way to be sure of what is and is not possible in this regard consistent with whatever turn out to be inviolate laws of physics. Thus this is no better than any other resurrection mythological belief wheeled out to give some (very thin when you examine it) comfort to the bereaved. Methinks we will take ending aging and mandatory death much more seriously when we stop coming up with such myths and beliefs. >>> From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 21 05:26:48 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 23:26:48 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? Message-ID: Brent Allsop brent.allsop at comcast.net : >I certainly agree the things like prostitution should not be illegal. That falls into a category called: "Consensual Crimes", of which libertarians and others also think should not be illegal. For anyone who is interested in a classic book on the topic: Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do by Peter McWilliams http://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-You-Consensual/dp/0931580587 The U.S. Government unfortunately _does_ think it's their business, and Peter McWilliams is dead now. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 05:29:37 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:29:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] No one dies re: Clarke, Arthur References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> Message-ID: <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Samantha writes > Giulio wrote >> Kevin writes: >> >>> I am sure that in a far distant future, perhaps thousands or even >>> hundreds of thousands of years after I am brought back from suspension, >>> we will find a way to peer back in time and recapture his information >>> state at the time of his death and "resurrect" him. I'll make it a >>> personal goal of mine. He can then bring back any of those others he >>> mentioned and even his dog. :-) >> >> http://universalimmortalism.org Oh yes, just posted a link to that myself. >> Though I am not _sure_ of this, I really hope so. Totally agree. Kevin is more optimistic than I am when he wrote that he's sure that it will be possible in the far distant future. But Kevin is totally right-on in the rest of his post, and the others he wrote on this subject. I concur completely. Back to Samantha: > And then what? You have reached back from the far highly capable future > and plucked someone out of his time. He is now in a world utterly > incomprehensible to most all of his assumptions and most of his > knowledge. What is happening in many sciences and many technologies is already totally incomprehensible to me, and as I wrote in the Race Biology thread a few moments ago, Brazilian society already has aspects that are incomprehensible to me (and there are probably a number of places and peoples in the world today who practices, habits, and beliefs I simply could never understand without having been raised there or without devoting years of anthopological society. So what? I have a nice little niche among people (I mostly understand, although having no clue about their internal workings), programs that I mostly understand (although ditto), and other things that make me quite happy whether I understand them or not. > A world where all that he cared about is very ancient and > not very interesting history. Are you sure any but the extremely rare > individual would thank you or be able to cope? Do you think that an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C. could somehow be brought to cope with living in a modern apartment with running water and a well-stocked refrigerator? If he had an income, he and his friends could even buy replicas of the old sacred drums or whatever he missed. Somehow, I don't think he'd be too crushed and bewildered to prefer being dead. > Even those individuals would require a tremendous amount of new > knowledge and tools really quickly. Nah. If I make it, and get the resources, the most advanced versions of me will run 2005 versions, 2010 versions, and so on, even though I (as the earlier versions) would naturally appreciate that what the AIs were thinking about and what a lot of people were into was way beyond me. So what? I already find the behavior of many people living in San Francisco incomprehensible, and they're only 40 miles away. But so long as I can be insulated from the elements, from rogue programs and people, and fashion my own environment pretty much the way I want it, I'll make out just fine. And truth be told, so will everyone else. > If you just implanted all that right now would the result more > than superficially be the original person? No, I think you're right about that. But see the threads on Merging Copies on SL4 during the last month or so. Lee From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Mar 21 05:39:54 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:39:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Lee Corbin" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:04 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Race Biology > Damien writes >> Sally Hemings' mother, Betty Hemings, was the daughter of the English >> Captain Hemings and a black slave woman brought from Africa >> (Wikipedia says), so her kids by Jefferson were three-quarters >> "white." That surely made them white, eh? Oh yeah? > > No, in the U.S. they'd be called black, because that's their relative > coloration compared to the rest of the people here. My stepdaughter (who sports white skin and wavy blonde hair - as a baby she was absolutely tow-headed) is 3/4 white and 1/4 black. Were you to meet her, there's no way you'd think she was anything but "white." I'm confused about what you meant by "coloration." Are you saying that a person is considered "black" as long as there is some evidence (i.e., physical difference from "whites") of this from his/her appearance? The reason my stepdaughter is considered "black" is due to the racist "one-drop" rule - it has nothing to do with her appearance (or coloration). Olga >> Obama's mother was a "white" USian from Kansas and his father a >> "black" Kenyan, so he's--what? How does the US culture refer to his >> "race"? > > If he went to Kenya, they'd probably call him white. After all, > compared to the rest of them he would be. > >> Arbitrarily-chosen phenotypic markers are determined by biology, >> obviously; the "race" of Hemings and her children and Barack Obama is >> determined by--what? > > That depends on whether you are more interested in the scientific, > more precise biological concept, or the societal one. As far as > the biological concept goes, they really were 25% African and > 75% white. > > Now socially, it is not too surprising that it may be a different story. > > For example, in Brazil there are a lot of well-to-do people that you > or I would unhesitatingly refer to as "black", because of the way that > we perceive their much darker skin color compared to many other > rich and influential people in Latin America, most of whom are white > (both culturally and biologically). > > But those particular well-to-do Brazilians will not simply be faking > indignation were you to describe them as black. They'd be truly > offended, because in the Brazilian mind, alleged coloration is subtly > (to us, anyway) correlated with social status, or wealth, or I don't > know what. > > But any honest geneticist who doesn't have a political axe to grind one > way or the other will tell you what proportion of their genes are African > dervived, what proportion are indigenous Indian, and what proportion > are European. > > Lee > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 05:50:11 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:50:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> At 10:04 PM 3/20/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: > > [Stuart:] > >> Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the > >> purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and > >> other social scientists rather than of biologists. > >> > >>### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property > >>related to common descent. > > > > Oh, the innocence. > >Damien, they're discussing the *scientific*, oops, *biological* concept. Oh, the innocence. *They* were discussing the biological concept, Lee? Look at Stuart's sentence you just quoted: "Race is almost entirely cultural... the purview of... social scientists rather than of biologists." What Stuart and Rafal were disagreeing about was precisely the salience of the biological in the ideological construct called "race". Yes, of course it's an element; skin color and hair type is biological--but the *use* to which those markers are put has for hundreds or thousands of years been cultural. Two hundred years ago, nobody was looking at major histocompatibility complexes when Europeans kidnapped Africans and enslaved them, or despised Asians as "lesser breeds without the law", or were despised in their turn. While that kind of (mis)use is made of characters irrelevant *except* for their value as politically-opportune identifiers for exclusion, exploitation, hatred or mistrust, it's absurd to act as if "race" is nothing but a biological concept of descent--"not in the least determined by culture." Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 06:20:10 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 01:20:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> At 10:29 PM 3/20/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: > > A world where all that he cared about is very ancient and > > not very interesting history. Are you sure any but the extremely rare > > individual would thank you or be able to cope? > >Do you think that an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C. could >somehow be brought to cope with living in a modern apartment >with running water and a well-stocked refrigerator? If he had an >income, he and his friends could even buy replicas of the old >sacred drums or whatever he missed. Somehow, I don't think >he'd be too crushed and bewildered to prefer being dead. This seems to be my day for feeling astonished disbelief at Lee's posts. Lee, do you think an aborigine from 2008 could make those adjustments (unless he'd been brought up to them), without being crushed or often stranded fatally in a world he'd never made, a stranger in a strange land? Read about the outback communities in Australia if you maintain this airy notion: the ruinous failure to adapt even after 200 years of European penetration and remaking of the land, even after schooling and policing by this alien culture. The very bases of traditional culture are all but gone; the land and animals and plants are either obliterated or held under lock and key by aliens; the languages have all but perished--and, far from nipping out to K-Mart to buy a replica drum, the kids sniff petrol until their brains rot, while the adults beat each other brutally and fuck everything that moves, including the petrol-sniffing kids. Yes, that's an exaggeration, but it's real to a bitter extent.## The difference, you might reply, is that *we* start with a cosmopolitan sense of the contingency of our own culture, a trained capacity to adapt to change. Maybe. Or better yet--in the future, new knowledge will be implanted directly. You'll thrive by becoming, in a jiffy, rewritten into someone other than you. How wonderful. Sure you want that? Damien Broderick ## No jail for rape of girl, 10 NINE males who pleaded guilty last month to gang-raping a 10-year-old girl at the Aurukun Aboriginal community on Cape York have escaped a prison term, with the sentencing judge saying the child victim "probably agreed" to have sex with them. Cairns-based District Court judge Sarah Bradley ordered that the six teenage juveniles not even have a conviction recorded for the 2005 offence, and that they be placed on a 12-month probation order. Judge Bradley sentenced three men over the age of consent of 16 - aged 17, 18 and 26 - to six months' imprisonment, with the sentence suspended for 12 months. Because the 28-day appeal period has expired, the sentences cannot be altered. Judge Bradley said from her Cairns home yesterday that she considered the sentences "appropriate" in the case because they were the penalties asked for by the Crown prosecutor. ========================= from an email exchange last year following the court case: ======== >So ... they don't have any minimum age of consent? I'm sure they must have. But it's a hierarchical male-brutalized sub-society at the end of its tether. The article depicts a terminal "behavioral sink" with the top rats picking with impunity on the lower rats, but everyone seething with barely controlled fury, ready to kill each other, so the judge tried not to inflame the brain-damaged lunatics. Not good law, but maybe workable politics. From stathisp at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 08:43:23 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:43:23 +1100 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 21/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > Lee, do you think an aborigine from 2008 could make those adjustments > (unless he'd been brought up to them), without being crushed or often > stranded fatally in a world he'd never made, a stranger in a strange > land? Read about the outback communities in Australia if you maintain > this airy notion: the ruinous failure to adapt even after 200 years > of European penetration and remaking of the land, even after > schooling and policing by this alien culture. The very bases of > traditional culture are all but gone; the land and animals and plants > are either obliterated or held under lock and key by aliens; the > languages have all but perished--and, far from nipping out to K-Mart > to buy a replica drum, the kids sniff petrol until their brains rot, > while the adults beat each other brutally and fuck everything that > moves, including the petrol-sniffing kids. Yes, that's an > exaggeration, but it's real to a bitter extent.## I might add (somewhat damaging my own argument with Lee and Rafal on this topic) that although Australians overall have among the best health in the world, Aboriginal Australians have among the worst. They were probably healthier before the disaster of European occupation than they are now with all the benefits of high quality, freely available 21st century medicine. -- Stathis Papaioannou From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 10:22:29 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:22:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] What Makes Us Human? {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA595499FBDC0C-1DB4-5EB@webmail-nc03.sysops.aol.com> Anne wrote: "Well, given some of the attitudes I've come across as of late, if humans did end up meeting intelligent aliens at any point, there would be groups of humans insisting that regardless of the fact that the aliens were perfectly happy the way they were, they ought to be coercively modified on the basis that they "don't know what they're missing" on account of not being human. You know, because it's "compassionate" and all. Blech. Seriously, I fear for any alien species that doesn't appear to act and think on average like your standard neurotypical human -- if I knew of any such species I would advise them to stay the heck away from Earth if they valued their freedom to self-determine at all. - Anne- _______________ Hi, Anne, did you watch on science channel 272 this topic on "What makes us human?" Even though we shared some 98% of our DNA with our cousin the apes, what makes us human is our culture, language and the potential to brake loose the chain of genetic enslavement. It was shown last night on cable at 9:00 p.m. thursday and again at 8:00 a.m. today, Friday on the same channel 272. The human race is till evolving somewhat gradually and the majority are still unaware of their potential to evolve further without the genetic constraint of the race. Perhaps those who have reached their potentials are what you call enlightened or what you call their freedom to self-determine their true potential. Terry From mbb386 at main.nc.us Fri Mar 21 10:57:56 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:57:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] META: The Evils of HTML In-Reply-To: <271f01c88b13$042d0d40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080320124049.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.c6a480b72e.wbe@email.secureserver.net> <271f01c88b13$042d0d40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <33208.12.77.169.78.1206097076.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Lee writes: > Kevin, I couldn't tell who was saying what either. I would repeat > the customary plea for people to not use HTML if at all possible. > Try harder to find the settings in your email client, or in a dropdown > menu somewhere, or on the web page from where you are posting. > I have the same problem with attributions and often just give up on posts that seem to make no sense because of this. > Not only that, a lot of people just skip HTML because of the > inevitable top-posting, bottom posting, and general confusion > attending such posts. Not only that, but it's felt that serious > posters---people who want their ideas to be addressed seriously > ---will take the pains to avoid HTML. > I've tried hard to use text, but I've been unable to find the setting that will show attribution. :( Very annoying. SquirrelMail. If my posts come through all messed up like those others I *hope* someone will please let me know. It's very hard for me to see them as others see them. ;) Regards, MB From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 11:11:14 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:11:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race is arbitrary {Terry} References: <8CA58A52F359176-210-4E6@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <275601c88b44$b8f52650$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes > Race is arbitrary, relative and temporary used by society and > individuals for convenience in communication, research and political > reasons. Just asking: would you say that since the atmosphere is turbulent anyway, that the meaning of "storm" is just temporary and is used by society and individuals for mere convenience in communication and research, and has no objective reality? After all, "it" --- if we want to reify --- is just one "end" or edge of a multidimensional reality (if you believe that it's a good idea to talk about "reality"). > We do not see thoughts of race or abstract ideas as movements of the > mind/brain. MRI showed brains are impacted by emotions or what is going > in the structure of the brain during periods of stress. One who clings > to the idea of race superiority or whatever feels stressful when he/she > is challenged. What do you mean, exactly, by "race superiority"? If you mean "excel at certain activities", then it's their adversaries who feel stressful when presented with the facts. Face it, it's going to be a long time before many Chinese, despite their numerosity, can run as fast as Kenyans. And Eskimos? They're just not built for it, sorry. There is also a fact that East Asians have larger brains, *especially* relative to their body size than do Africans, just as the early 20th century scientists had calculated, before Stephen Gould and a lot of politically correct types muddied the waters and successfully hit the truth ("for fear of social consequences", I surmise). You can't hide from truths like these forever. On the other hand, if you mean that some race is as superior to another as, say, chimpanzees are superior to the little animals they hunt, then I agree with you that no human race is superior to another. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 11:23:38 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:23:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryogenics Faith or a Belief? References: <8CA58B004C4BA06-210-8EE@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> <2d6187670803201026i1da76098w328591a8cad8e5ad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <276001c88b46$1ff5c070$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Grigg writes > Terry wrote: > > The changes in climate that cause drought cause the migration of > > primates from one place to another to look for food. In turn these > > events cause the domino effect leading to the present conflict/ wars > > between the affluent and less affluent nations. Look on the bright side, Terry. It's been over sixty years since any large powerful nation on Earth struck another one as hard as it could. This is truly a remarkable improvement worth celebrating! A real historical first. August 9 should be a world-wide holiday. > > The probability of this happening is high and imho cryogenics is a > > belief akin to a religious belief if we cling to it as the only solution to > > the preservation of the human race. John rightfully scoffs at this: (well, except that John is to nice a guy to really scoff at anything anyone says..... I'm trying to read between the lines LOL!) > Cryonics as a solution for the need to preserve the human race in case > of impending extinction? LOL Where did you get that idea? Cryonics > as it is practiced today (and in the near future) will not be as an escape > vehicle for humanity! It takes a decent social and economic infrastructure > to support a cryonics facility. Absolutely. On the most charitable reading, Terry might be saying that cryonics is the only preservation of human beings considered one-by-one as they die, but like John, I doubt that this was all that Terry meant. > Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen as > competing with it. Certainly not, I agree totally. In this wise, cryonics is best described as a scientific hypothesis. No one I've ever heard says that cryonics is salvation because some angel told them so, or that it's got the backing of a deity. On the contrary. You'll also never find a cryonicist---unlike the religious types---ever claiming to know that it will work with 100% probability. > A handful of scientists with rather limited funds have worked very hard > to get cryonics where it is now (and it still has a long ways to go). Not to mention a lot of dedication and hard work by people exactly like John Grigg! Thanks so much, John! Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 11:31:06 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:31:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? References: <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <276c01c88b47$8694b290$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Anne writes > Lee wrote > > > No, no meeting with aliens is required at all. We already look at other > > mammals even on our own planet askance, as if they weren't fully human. > > In fact, they're often treated as if, well, as if they were animals. :-) > > Well, given some of the attitudes I've come across as of late, if humans > did end up meeting intelligent aliens at any point, there would be groups > of humans insisting that regardless of the fact that the aliens were perfectly > happy the way they were, they ought to be coercively modified on the > basis that they "don't know what they're missing" on account of not being > human. You know, because it's "compassionate" and all. Blech. Can you give any on-line type examples? That attitude in the west went out about a century ago at the time of Kipling and "the white man's burden". (Of course, there are always small groups wanting any kind of development that can be specified.) If you mean religions wanting more converts, or Democrats wanting more converts, that's quite another thing. Some aliens will probably want to convert us to some of their beliefs too. That's how memetics works, and it's really not all bad. > Seriously, I fear for any alien species that doesn't appear to act and > think on average like your standard neurotypical human -- if I knew > of any such species I would advise them to stay the heck away from > Earth if they valued their freedom to self-determine at all. Seriously, I would fear for us, for humanity, if we don't better internalize how evolution works. Chance are just as good that they'll be the relative bad guys, rather than us. Why is it always assumed that humans are almost surely morally inferior to (hypothetical aliens)? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 11:39:03 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:39:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <277001c88b48$3a59f7e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Olga writes > Lee wrote > >> Damien writes > >>> Sally Hemings' mother, Betty Hemings, was the daughter of the English >>> Captain Hemings and a black slave woman brought from Africa >>> (Wikipedia says), so her kids by Jefferson were three-quarters >>> "white." That surely made them white, eh? Oh yeah? >> >> No, in the U.S. they'd be called black, because that's their relative >> coloration compared to the rest of the people here. > > My stepdaughter (who sports white skin and wavy blonde hair - as a baby she > was absolutely tow-headed) is 3/4 white and 1/4 black. Were you to meet > her, there's no way you'd think she was anything but "white." I'll bet that a *lot* of the reason is due to the color of her skin. > I'm confused about what you meant by "coloration." Just that. > Are you saying that a person is considered "black" as long as there > is some evidence (i.e., physical difference from "whites") of this from > his/her appearance? In most countries, this is true. In the U.S., and I think in Oceania, white people are so deemed chiefly because they have very light colored skin (even compared to Japanese women, to the great consternation of the late 19th century Japanese). They also have other obvious outward physical markers, such as thin noses and with more of a tendency towards dolichocephalism. > The reason my stepdaughter is considered "black" is due to the racist > "one-drop" rule - it has nothing to do with her appearance (or coloration). Really. And just how do people on the street know her family history. As they say here, can't she easily "pass for white"? Unless you're not being entirely forthcoming about her appearance. But I'm eager to learn: is there some kind of official classification where she lives, like there used to be in South Africa (and, for all I know, still is)? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 12:00:35 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 05:00:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com><26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <278101c88b4b$bae188d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > At 10:04 PM 3/20/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: >> > [Stuart:] >> >> Race is almost entirely cultural so it is more the >> >> purview of anthropologists, ethnographers, and >> >> other social scientists rather than of biologists. >> >> >> >>### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property >> >>related to common descent. >> > >> > Oh, the innocence. >> >>Damien, they're discussing the *scientific*, oops, *biological* concept. > > Oh, the innocence. Come now. Stuart has claimed from the beginning that he's discussing the biological reality behind what he dismisses as "race" (having suggested, originally, that the whole idea from a biological point of view is just fallacious). > *They* were discussing the biological concept, Lee? Look at Stuart's > sentence you just quoted: > > "Race is almost entirely cultural... the purview of... social > scientists rather than of biologists." Addressed. > What Stuart and Rafal were disagreeing about was precisely the > salience of the biological in the ideological construct called > "race". Not the way I read it, Damien. Each claimed to be discussing the biological reality; hence their highly technical exchanges. Thanks to Rafal, BTW, for the reference to "Lewontin's Fallacy", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewontin's_Fallacy . I had read about the refutation of that in general terms, but had no idea that it had acquired a label already. > Yes, of course it's an element; skin color and hair type is > biological--but the *use* to which those markers are put has for > hundreds or thousands of years been cultural. Agreed. Only recently, especially in medicine, are the by-and-large same classifications being being successfully used in medicine. > Two hundred years ago, nobody was looking at major histocompatibility > complexes when Europeans kidnapped Africans and enslaved them, nor were the African kings who routinely, following the customs of primitive people all over the world (recall "slave" derives from "Slav"), enslaved their defeated enemies, and who sold far more of them to Arab traders than to western sea merchants. But being non-European, the Arabs generally get a pass on this, even though slavery IS STILL GOING ON in east Africa and among Muslims who're still eager for more slaves. So why did you happen to single out the Europeans? > or [continuing the litany of Western thought-crime] despised Asians > as "lesser breeds without the law", and I suppose you never heard what the inhabitants of the Central Kingdom under Heaven thought of Westerners, and, in fact anyone not Chinese? Looking down your nose at other tribes or other peoples was hardly invented by just the detested Europeans. > While that kind of (mis)use is made of characters > irrelevant *except* for their value as politically-opportune > identifiers for exclusion, exploitation, hatred or mistrust, it's > absurd to act as if "race" is nothing but a biological concept of > descent--"not in the least determined by culture." Oh, no, I didn't say that! Didn't you read the rest of my post? Here is the relevant part of the rest, for your convenience: > Arbitrarily-chosen phenotypic markers are determined by biology, > obviously; the "race" of Hemings and her children and Barack Obama is > determined by--what? That depends on whether you are more interested in the scientific, more precise biological concept, or the societal one. As far as the biological concept goes, they really were 25% African and 75% white. Now socially, it is not too surprising that it may be a different story. For example, in Brazil there are a lot of well-to-do people that you or I would unhesitatingly refer to as "black", because of the way that we perceive their much darker skin color compared to many other rich and influential people in Latin America, most of whom are white (both culturally and biologically). But those particular well-to-do Brazilians will not simply be faking indignation were you to describe them as black. They'd be truly offended, because in the Brazilian mind, alleged coloration is subtly (to us, anyway) correlated with social status, or wealth, or I don't know what. But any honest geneticist who doesn't have a political axe to grind one way or the other will tell you what proportion of their genes are African dervived, what proportion are indigenous Indian, and what proportion are European. I readily concede that historically all societies have been more concerned with race as denoted by superficial markings---it was only recently that we learned that race differences go more than skin deep. I also admit that certain societies, especially in the 19th century in the American south, were keen to devise any explanation that would help serve their ends of justifying slavery. > it's absurd to act as if "race" is nothing but a biological concept of > descent--"not in the least determined by culture." Do you have any examples of someone on this list claiming that? Or is that just a straw man? Hmm, of course, your real audience may be society at large who you are attempting to reform, not the real, live people here with whom you are trying to exchange ideas and gain understanding? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 12:47:51 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 05:47:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: The Evils of HTML References: <20080320124049.38f036b76284185e041b1b237c97abe6.c6a480b72e.wbe@email.secureserver.net><271f01c88b13$042d0d40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33208.12.77.169.78.1206097076.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <27ab01c88b52$09121be0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> MB writes > Lee writes: > >> Kevin, I couldn't tell who was saying what either. I would repeat >> the customary plea for people to not use HTML if at all possible. >> Try harder to find the settings in your email client, or in a dropdown >> menu somewhere, or on the web page from where you are posting. > > I have the same problem with attributions and often just give up on posts that seem > to make no sense because of this. Yeah, I think it's pretty widespread. >> Not only that, a lot of people just skip HTML because of the >> inevitable top-posting, bottom posting, and general confusion >> attending such posts. Not only that, but it's felt that serious >> posters---people who want their ideas to be addressed seriously >> ---will take the pains to avoid HTML. > > I've tried hard to use text, but I've been unable to find the setting that will show > attribution. :( Very annoying. SquirrelMail. Oh, well, I myself almost always edit the machine-produced initial attribution line, to make it more readable. But then the effort is worth it to me not only because I'll increase my readership, but also on the principle (and duty, really) that I should be as responsible as possible posting on lists, to raise the overall list quality. > If my posts come through all messed up like those others I *hope* someone will > please let me know. It's very hard for me to see them as others see them. ;) They look fine to me! That is, I don't recall seeing anything wrong. Will do. Regards, Lee From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 13:34:01 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:34:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Technology re: What makes us human. Message-ID: <8CA596F5B9CA7F8-1298-253B@webmail-me05.sysops.aol.com> >From science website on what makes us human: "Technology Some of the apes are famous for tool use, but none make tools which consist of more than one working part. Humans are the only animal to have mastered technology. At its most basic level we use technology to feed, house, clothe and transport ourselves. With it we can contain ourselves within our own tropical micro-environments and inhabit every inhospitable corner of the globe. Back to the future We are probably the only species on the planet to contemplate its own origins and its own future. By looking back over evolutionary time, by understanding the stuff we're made from, we might be able to plan what we need for the future. Our planet cannot last forever because the sun only has a limited life time before it burns us all to a frazzle. Will humans be the first animal species from Earth to develop the technologies to take the micro-environment that they need into space? Might sound far-fetched but ultimately this is what our species will have to do if it is to survive." ______________ I googled the above and scrolled down to the last paragraph under technology. Thanks to our rich cultural heritage in history, philosophy and science we have an advantage from other animal species using sophisticated technology and mathematical language to discover and understand our nature. Terry From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Fri Mar 21 14:49:20 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:49:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <47E3CAF0.8050209@insightbb.com> > > The reason my stepdaughter is considered "black" is due to the racist > "one-drop" rule - it has nothing to do with her appearance (or coloration). > > Olga > > > The great thing to remember is that the "one drop" rule doesn't specify how many generations are to be considered which is why I always mark EVERY box on my race questionnaires even though the last "African American" descendant I had was probably over 6000 years ago (And I used the SWAG method to determine this number) From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 14:41:17 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:41:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Genetic Suicide re: What makes us human. Message-ID: <8CA5978C12A7317-17C8-2B7@FWM-M38.sysops.aol.com> What makes us truly human according to the science documentary is the ability to contemplate our own destiny. Why do some of us can postpone sexual gratification by practicing celibacy or monogamy without breeding children to perpetuate the race? Is it the selfish gene? ________ John wrote : "I don't know the official statistics of happy and loving marriages within the West ( I realize roughly half of all marriages ultimately don't make it). But there still are many happy marriages out there and please remember, you must first love yourself before you can love another. The big transition within a marriage is when the "fantasy/idealized" image of their partner at least partially fades in the bright light of imperfect reality, and yet they can still deeply love that person, anyway. And yes, many couples stay together for the sake of the children, which is definitely not always a good idea. Kids can pick up on the fact that mom and dad are just not happy with each other (even when the parents think this is a well-kept secret)." ______________ Hi, John, kids are good imitators, according to some sociopsychologists, due to mirror neurons. Pop culture dominates in the west due to mirror neurons and in the east the same tendency of the masses is to imitate the beliefs of the majority of their population. Some stay married whether they are happy or not because of enculturation/memes. Those who chose to stop breeding according to that science documentary is parallel to committing genetic suicide. Terry From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 15:13:21 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:13:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <278101c88b4b$bae188d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> <278101c88b4b$bae188d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321100332.023a7158@satx.rr.com> At 05:00 AM 3/21/2008 -0700, Lee wrote, adding his own gloss in brackets: > > or [continuing the litany of Western thought-crime] despised Asians > > as "lesser breeds without the law", > >and I suppose you never heard what the inhabitants of the Central >Kingdom under Heaven thought of Westerners, and, in fact anyone >not Chinese? Looking down your nose at other tribes or other >peoples was hardly invented by just the detested Europeans. It is mischievous, Lee, to say this, *having just deleted the end of my sentence* which made exactly that point: > or were despised in their turn. > > While that kind of (mis)use is made of characters > > irrelevant *except* for their value as politically-opportune > > identifiers for exclusion, exploitation, hatred or mistrust, it's > > absurd to act as if "race" is nothing but a biological concept of > > descent--"not in the least determined by culture." > >Oh, no, I didn't say that! Didn't you read the rest of my post? Yes. The words in quotes are taken directly from Rafal's post. >Do you have any examples of someone on this list claiming that? >Or is that just a straw man? >> >>### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property >> >>related to common descent. Damien Broderick From citta437 at aol.com Fri Mar 21 16:27:58 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:27:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA5987A8B1422E-1598-1324@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> "Do US politicians not believe in evolution? I thought that even in the US that is a minority position, especially among those with a University education. Even the Pope believes in evolution! -Stathis Papaioannou _________________ Are you serious? If the Pope believes in evolution why that would be a miracle of cosmic proportion! Honestly, US politicians might pretend to believe or not in evolution for some personal/political reason. The closing of several urban churches and Catholic schools according to statistics is rising in the US due to dwindling attendance in schools and in Sunday mass and other religious services. The Pope believes only in holy matrimony not legalized prostitution or am I missing something? Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 17:06:41 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:06:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} In-Reply-To: <8CA5987A8B1422E-1598-1324@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5987A8B1422E-1598-1324@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803211006y7b19f5cdm90e8f2636aa770f0@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: >The Pope believes only in holy matrimony not legalized prostitution or >am I missing something? I think if you spoke to some of his predecessors from centuries back that you might be quite shocked at how extremely liberal they were compared to the current Pope.... The medieval Roman Catholic Church has an interesting and at times very contradictory relationship with the subject of prostitution. Some Bishops with the blessing of the Church actually managed and owned brothels! Prostitution was seen by the Church as a "necessary evil" to keep "wicked and sex obsessed" men from going after "decent women." And yet, though the institution of prostitution was often not persecuted due to this, there were efforts to help rehabilitate individual women involved in the profession. I can imagine myself being reanimated in the mid 22nd century and being shocked at how the Roman Catholic Church (and other religious organizations) may have changed! John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Fri Mar 21 17:27:31 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:27:31 -0500 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 11:53 PM 3/20/2008, Anne wrote: >Well, given some of the attitudes I've come across as of late, if >humans did end up meeting intelligent aliens at any point, there >would be groups of humans insisting that regardless of the fact that >the aliens were perfectly happy the way they were, they ought to be >coercively modified on the basis that they "don't know what they're >missing" on account of not being human. You know, because it's >"compassionate" and all. Blech. Can you please provide examples of what attitudes you are referring to which is fueling your gas? I meet humans on a daily basis who want me to conform to their wet-wiring; but it is more openly religious and/or political than veiled by compassion. >Seriously, I fear for any alien species that doesn't appear to act >and think on average like your standard neurotypical human -- if I >knew of any such species I would advise them to stay the heck away >from Earth if they valued their freedom to self-determine at all. In reality it seems that humans would be shocked and bewildered and take a long pause about the consequences of coercing a likemindedness. Natasha From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 17:30:48 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:30:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryogenics Faith or a Belief? In-Reply-To: <276001c88b46$1ff5c070$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58B004C4BA06-210-8EE@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> <2d6187670803201026i1da76098w328591a8cad8e5ad@mail.gmail.com> <276001c88b46$1ff5c070$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <2d6187670803211030y1c8656f4le6ec8085cb8350cf@mail.gmail.com> Lee Corbin wrote: Not to mention a lot of dedication and hard work by people exactly like John Grigg! Thanks so much, John! >>> Lee, thank you so much for the very kind words. I have not done much compared to what some have given, but I like to view myself as a "booster" for cryonics. Hey, if there can be sports team boosters, why not cryonics? : ) John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 18:11:04 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:11:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <2d6187670803211111x74090c88ue6665741fc57a3ff@mail.gmail.com> Lee Corbin wrote: Seriously, I would fear for us, for humanity, if we don't better internalize how evolution works. Chance are just as good that they'll be the relative bad guys, rather than us. Why is it always assumed that humans are almost surely morally inferior to (hypothetical aliens)? >>> I remember Keith Henson saying if we meet an alien race where we must compete for available resources that there will be trouble. But that if we are on different planes/levels we might much more easily avoid conflict. I think it is assumed that the aliens would technologically be our better (if they show up on our doorstep during the next century or so) and that they would also correspondingly be our ethical superior. I'm not so sure the latter should be assumed... I could see a race of aliens who are highly cooperative among each other but who see other sentient races as potential threats that absolutely must be wiped out. Anne Corwin wrote: >Seriously, I fear for any alien species that doesn't appear to act >and think on average like your standard neurotypical human -- if I >knew of any such species I would advise them to stay the heck away >from Earth if they valued their freedom to self-determine at all. Please keep in mind that if *they* are the one in the technologically superior position, *we* will be the ones squirming in our seats in fear of what they may do to us. Our freedom and self-determination may be in their hands/tentacles/claws, etc... Natasha Vita-More wrote: In reality it seems that humans would be shocked and bewildered and take a long pause about the consequences of coercing a likemindedness. >>> I totally agree. And I think humans would only consider coercing a likemindedness if they felt there would not be a strong potential for provoking an angry and highly destructive reaction. On the other hand, I could see humans trying to entice/encourage aliens to learn about us by trying out some of our customs and favorite activities (for instance, the aliens would have to be radically different in terms of biology and also utterly horrific looking for at least some humans to not want to attempt having sex with them). And that would be a good thing! I would worry about the "cult of celebrity/TMZ/paparazzi, etc." bothering alien visitors. But I have a feeling that in the name of national security/keeping the aliens happy, they would be put in their place by government enforcement agencies. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 18:58:03 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:58:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Crow and Kitten are Friends In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <29666bf30803211158x767391b5jaf1ec7e992e43b0f@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Jef Allbright wrote: > A different take on appreciating others despite differences. > And I got this in the mail yesterday. A perfect example of animal empathy: http://puppyintraining.com/assistance-dogs-and-puppies/seeing-eye-cat-cashew-and-libby/ "An Eye On You Cashew, the 14-year-old lab is blind and deaf. Her best friend is 7-year-old Libby, her seeing-eye cat. Libby steers Cashew away from obstacles and leads her to food. Every night she sleeps next to her. The only time they are apart is when Cashew goes for a walk. Without this cat, Cashew would be lost and very, very lonely. Amazing but true: this is one animal that knows what needs to be done and does it day in and day out for her friend. - - Terry Burns" PJ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 20:17:24 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:17:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ACC Video: To Plan for a Century Message-ID: <2d6187670803211317p5ed4771eybb9fb66347c07c34@mail.gmail.com> I found this Arthur C. Clarke gem from the Livescience website: http://www.livescience.com/php/video/player.php?video_id=080319-clarke John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 21:09:38 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:09:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] ACC Video: To Plan for a Century In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803211317p5ed4771eybb9fb66347c07c34@mail.gmail.co m> References: <2d6187670803211317p5ed4771eybb9fb66347c07c34@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321155533.023811f8@satx.rr.com> At 01:17 PM 3/21/2008 -0700, John Grigg wrote: >I found this Arthur C. Clarke gem from the Livescience website: > >http://www.livescience.com/php/video/player.php?video_id=080319-clarke The visuals at the beginning are unintentionally hilarious--a guy on the steps throws something on the ground (hey! no littering, dude!), a student in a sparsely filled lecture covers his face then rubs it as if trying to stay awake, a girl in bright yellow checks her watch, another guy mutters to himself, the Chinese guys look like a cruel WWII parody of jutty-toothed chinks, and poor ACC battles with giant chartreuse prompt sheets and drones through his bureaubabble, almost all his fabled poetry absent. Ah well. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 21:18:03 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:18:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] antimatter asymmetries Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321161623.024f9350@satx.rr.com> [apologies for the baby talk] New twist to matter-antimatter mystery Thursday, 20 March 2008 by Ker Than Cosmos Online NEW YORK: A new particle-smashing experiment has uncovered surprising evidence that nature treats matter and antimatter differently. The findings, detailed today in the U.K. journal Nature, suggests that a complete solution to the mystery of why the observable universe is dominated by matter, and not antimatter, may have to await the discovery of novel particles or the invention of new physics. Antimatter is the weird twin of matter. For every particle of normal matter, there is a particle of equal mass but opposite electric charge. When a normal particle and an anti-particle collide, they annihilate one another in an explosion of pure energy. Weird twin According to the standard model of physics, matter and antimatter were created in equal quantities shortly after the Big Bang. The two types of particles should have thus cancelled each other out and the universe should be permeated by energy. But as our existence attests, that did not happen. Experiments suggests the universe today is composed of about 75 per cent dark energy, 20 per cent dark matter, and five per cent matter/antimatter, with the overwhelming bulk of the latter consisting of normal matter. A major mystery of modern physics is why normal matter particles are the building blocks of the observable universe. Why are we not made of antimatter? Or pure energy? Scientists speculate that a tiny imbalance in the early universe allowed a small fraction of normal matter ? one particle for every one billion ? to avoid annihilation and survive to form stars, planets, and humans. In recent years, experts have attempted to artificially recreate this primaeval imbalance using high-energy particle smashers. In this latest study, a consortium of international researchers called the Belle collaboration, led by Paoti Chang at the National Taiwan University in Taipei, used the high-energy KEK-B accelerator in Japan to collide electrons and their antimatter counterpart, positrons. When these two particles smash together, they create a burst of pure energy which quickly materialises into particles called 'B mesons'. The experiment created four different types of B mesons: neutral B mesons; the antimatter counterpart of neutral B mesons, sometimes called anti-Bs; positive B mesons; and the antimatter counterpart of positive B mesons, called negative B mesons. Twice the asymmetry A study in 2004 showed that neutral B mesons break down, or "decay," into other subatomic particles faster than anti-Bs. Scientists had previously assumed that the differences in makeup between different B mesons were minor. This led them to predict that positive B mesons should decay at the same rate as neutral B mesons (since both are normal matter particles), and that negative B mesons should decay at the same rate as anti-Bs (both are antimatter particles). The new study reveals this isn't true. The team found that neutral B mesons decayed faster than anti-Bs, but positive B mesons decayed slower than their antiparticles. "It's not just that there's a particle-antiparticle asymmetry. It's that there are two particle-antiparticle asymmetries that are different from one another," commented Michael Peskin, a theorist at Stanford University in California, U.S. who was not involved in the study. "That's the thing that tips you off there's something new that's going on." The new results are similar to unpublished data recently gathered by another international team working at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Centre called BaBar, of which Peskin is a member. Considered together, the teams' findings can't easily be explained by the standard model of physics, and could "hint of an entirely new mechanism for particle-antiparticle asymmetry," Peskin said. http://belle.kek.jp/ From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 21:27:07 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:27:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803211427t13b21f31p5d447523b6ebba09@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:50 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > What Stuart and Rafal were disagreeing about was precisely the > salience of the biological in the ideological construct called > "race". Yes, of course it's an element; skin color and hair type is > biological--but the *use* to which those markers are put has for > hundreds or thousands of years been cultural. > > ### According to Webster's dictionary, a race is a breeding stock of animals, or a taxonomic category within a species (like a breed), or a group of people belonging to the same stock (i.e. descent). Plus a few other meanings, including cultural ones. The primary meaning has to do with decent, and identifiable differences between groups of different descent within a potentially interbreeding population. These are strictly biological facts, in the sense that an automaton completely ignorant of culture would be able to analyze and properly segregate organisms strictly by investigating their inherited traits. Of course, if Stuart flatly denies the biological existence human races, I will point to the well-established biological definition. Now, we could start the old dictionary scuffle. One could say that there are situations where the term "race" is used in a culturally defined way (as in "Aryan race"). Or one could point to the lumpers and splitters among anthropologists and the controversy over the number of human races (3? 30? 300?). But what's the point? Biological races exist, it's an undeniable fact. Whether races exist or not, haters will find an excuse to hate. It's a wrong idea to deny facts simply because haters use the facts as excuses (not reasons) for hating. It's much more fruitful to say that race is a strictly biological concept, frequently misused by ideologues, rather than to claim that race is an ideological concept, with some shaky make-believe biology tacked on. If you take the latter approach, you will have to twist your mind into denying hard science facts, and this is unhealthy for a rational person to do. You will not defuse racial hatred, since racists don't care much about biology. Palestinians and Sephardim are essentially identical on the genetic level but still engage in mutual slaughter. You can't fight racism if you put yourself in opposition to facts, and simply try to put racists down on the ideological level. You can be much more effective if you are familiar and friendly with the biological facts, and say you simply don't hate any people, unless the individuals in question actually do something evil. Like beating an innocent man because of his skin color. Isn't this more reasonable? The proper way is to say "Race is real. And I don't care a damn". Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 21 22:36:12 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:36:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60803211427t13b21f31p5d447523b6ebba09@mail.gmail.co m> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60803211427t13b21f31p5d447523b6ebba09@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321171526.025f6a18@satx.rr.com> At 05:27 PM 3/21/2008 -0400, Rafal wrote: >The primary meaning has to do with de[s]cent, and identifiable >differences between groups of different descent within a potentially >interbreeding population. These are strictly biological facts, in >the sense that an automaton completely ignorant of culture would be >able to analyze and properly segregate organisms strictly by >investigating their inherited traits. By "properly" I assume you mean "reliably" or "replicably" rather than "appropriately." The distinction is important. What canon of criteria, independent-of-human-history, does the automaton use to select the major traits it uses to characterize individuals into 3, 30 or 300 "human races"? For example, to what extent are the tens of thousands of traits of people called "Negroes" or "blacks" cross-correlated, and would the automatons rediscover this "racial group" as automatons have rediscovered certain theorems of set theory? *We* know they nearly all have visibly darker skin that some other humans of historically different geographical descent, of course. Do they all have thick everted lips? No. Wide flattened noses? No. Kinky hair? No. Specific blood types? MHC genes? Fast twitch muscles? Weeeeellll--of course, those people traditionally labelled "black" whose ancestors lived fairly segregated lives in regions of Africa or Papua or Australia or India for many many generations will tend to share some but not all of these traits. Plenty of other people of different historical descent in widely separated parts of the planet will share other traits. What's a poor mindless automaton to do? Look at tooth size? Fingernail shape? Exact hue of liver? Height? Girth? IQ? Ah, look, here's the "race of Mensans" popping out! They all do great on tests, and you can tell them by their distinctive skin color... well, no, wait, it's true that many have ancestors from China and Japan, but that's also true of a very large number of fairly ordinary or stupid people. Damien Broderick From pjmanney at gmail.com Fri Mar 21 22:51:58 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:51:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] MC Frontalot - Secrets from the Future Message-ID: <29666bf30803211551u5f33423et71fe0a3ed9f05045@mail.gmail.com> For those of you who disdain rap for being only about gangstas and hoes, etc., check out nerdrapper MC Frontalot's song, "Secrets From The Future", about encryption. Fun stuff. PJ http://youtube.com/watch?v=nuRbyQx_bOY http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9YoQm1Iz54 http://www.frontalot.com/index.php/?page=lyrics&lyricid=41 Secrets From The Future Get your most closely kept personal thought: put it in the Word .doc with a password lock. Stock it deep in the .rar with extraction precluded by the ludicrous length and the strength of a reputedly dictionary-attack-proof string of characters (this, imperative to thwart all the disparagers of privacy: the NSA and Homeland S). You better PGP the .rar because so far they ain't impressed. You better take the .pgp and print the hex of it out, scan that into a TIFF. Then, if you seek redoubt for your data, scramble up the order of the pixels with a one-time pad that describes the fun time had by the thick-soled- boot-wearing stomper who danced to produce random claptrap, all the intervals in between which, set in tandem with the stomps themselves, begat a seed of math unguessable. Ain't no complaint about this cipher that's redressable! Best of all, your secret: nothing extant could extract it. By 2025 a children's Speak & Spell could crack it. You can't hide secrets from the future with math. You can try, but I bet that in the future they laugh at the half-assed schemes and algorithms amassed to enforce cryptographs in the past. And future people do not give a damn about your shopping, your Visa number SSL'd to Cherry-Popping Hot Grampa Action websites that you visit, nor password-protected partitions, no matter how illicit. And this, it would seem, is your saving grace: the amazing haste of people to forget your name, your face, your litanous* list of indefensible indiscretions. In fact, the only way that you could pray to make impression on the era ahead is if, instead of being notable, you make the data describing you undecodable for script kiddies sifting in that relic called the internet (seeking latches on treasure chests that they could wreck in seconds but didn't yet get a chance to cue up for disassembly) to discover and crack the cover like a cr?me br?l?e. They'll glance you over, I guess, and then for a bare moment you'll persist to exist; almost seems like you're there, don't it? But you're not. You're here. Your name will fade as Front's will, 'less in the future they don't know our cryptovariables still. Now it's an Enigma machine, a code yelled out at top volume through a tin can with a thin string, and that ain't all you do to broadcast cleartext of your intentions. Send an email to the government pledging your abstention from vote fraud this time (next time: can't promise). See you don't get a visit from the department of piranhas. Be honest; you ain't hacking those. It'd be too easy, setting up the next president, pretending that you were through freezing when you're nothing but warming up: 'to do' list in your diary (better keep for a long time ? and the long time better be tiring to the distribution of electrical brains that are guessing every unsalted hash that ever came). They got alien technology to make the rainbow tables with, then in an afternoon of glancing at 'em, secrets don't resist the loving coax of the mathematical calculation, heart of your mystery sent free-fall into palpitations. Computron will rise up in the dawn, a free agent. Nobody knows the future now; gonna find out ? be patient. *litanous: adj., comprising a litany or litanies From amara at amara.com Fri Mar 21 23:37:51 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:37:51 -0600 Subject: [ExI] ACC Video: To Plan for a Century Message-ID: Damien Broderick: >almost all his fabled poetry absent. Ah well. Too bad. :-( Well here I say something about planning for 7 years from now. The year 2015 is closer than you think. http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2008/03/experimental-traffic-jams.html#c5029629673430394411 Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Mar 21 23:53:23 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:53:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > Lee wrote: > >> > A world where all that he cared about is very ancient and >> > not very interesting history. Are you sure any but the extremely rare >> > individual would thank you or be able to cope? >> >> Do you think that an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C. could >> somehow be brought to cope with living in a modern apartment >> with running water and a well-stocked refrigerator? If he had an >> income, he and his friends could even buy replicas of the old >> sacred drums or whatever he missed. Somehow, I don't think >> he'd be too crushed and bewildered to prefer being dead. > > Lee, do you think an aborigine from 2008 could make those adjustments > (unless he'd been brought up to them), without being crushed or often > stranded fatally in a world he'd never made, a stranger in a strange > land? Yes. But at least 2008-type people will be no worse off than they are now. Because, as from what follows from you next say > Read about the outback communities in Australia if you maintain > this airy notion: the ruinous failure to adapt even after 200 years > of European penetration and remaking of the land, even after > schooling and policing by this alien culture. The very bases of > traditional culture are all but gone; the land and animals and plants > are either obliterated or held under lock and key by aliens; the > languages have all but perished--and, far from nipping out to K-Mart > to buy a replica drum, the kids sniff petrol until their brains rot, > while the adults beat each other brutally and fuck everything that > moves, including the petrol-sniffing kids. Yes, that's an > exaggeration, but it's real to a bitter extent.## If we examine the piecemeal actual causes, we see that those people are in no way permitted (or find it impossible) to maintain the same traditional culture that worked better for them. The Americans tried another approach, locking up their aboriginals on reservations, free to practice whatever traditional ways they wanted to (though I confess they didn't get good hunting land, in general). But new technology and new drugs sneaked in anyway. With similar, but not so extreme results. (Probably because the American Indians were already at a rather higher level of technology and civilization than the Australian aborigines.) You do highlight a danger I had not considered. Let's suppose as did the original hypothesis of this thread, that a few million or thousand of us find ourselves living suddenly in 20,008, but only (of course) as uploads, matter being far too valuable in this corner of the galaxy to waste on primitive methods of computation. Then there could indeed be a menace from actually shocking ideas ---perhaps SL9?---and bizarre changes that one might have the freedom to inflict on himself or herself. What to do? Easy! By then our immensely superior mind-children will have warning labels on all such memes, and if people really do want to kill or damage themselves, then what? Deny them the "right" of suicide? I imagine that something of the same paradox may exist and have existed in Australia. If, say, two percent of the Chinese immigrate to Australia, and the continent gets its own dictatorial Central Committee, then what should the chairman do about the aboriginal problems? Since unlike our remote descendents he has no really better understanding of what is happening than the victims (the aboriginals) themselves, he's got to end up doing some guesswork ---or better yet, trial programs here and there on various small units within the native population. I might suggest, for the sake of their own children's happiness if not for the parents, that they be taken as individuals---not communities ---into Melbourne or Sydney, and in effect forced to live like everyone else, so that these memes and artifacts, (e.g. alcohol) won't be so hideously destructive to them. (I actually see no better solution to this very sad situation.) Or maybe investing some real money (I don't know how much this would cost) to try to restore certain regions to how they were. But this seems hopeless---"you can't get the people back on the farms again", as I think is said here, and now that they've heard of the features of modern society and technology, and find many of them appealing, there won't be any stopping them from getting the ones they want. On a positive note, the "treatment" that the aborigines has received from the European colonists was far better than that usually afforded historically. Any local nuisance population vastly inferior in technology was quickly eradicated without a qualm. > The difference, you might reply, is that *we* start with a > cosmopolitan sense of the contingency of our own culture, > a trained capacity to adapt to change. Maybe. I'm not so sure either. > Or better yet--in the future, new knowledge will be implanted directly. > You'll thrive by becoming, in a jiffy, rewritten into someone other than you. Yikes! I've been warning "radical uploaders" since 1990 or 91 in an article in the Immortalist by that name. If you choose (even willingly and in full knowledge) any path of personal evolutionary development that fails to provide for earlier versions of you to also get a little runtime, then you're just committing suicide in a brand new way. I'm shocked that even folks like Ralph Merkle (conversation) years ago didn't see any danger here. > How wonderful. Sure you want that? Totally agree. 100%. Lee > > No jail for rape of girl, 10 > > NINE males who pleaded guilty last month to gang-raping a 10-year-old > girl at the Aurukun Aboriginal community on Cape York have escaped a > prison term, with the sentencing judge saying the child victim > "probably agreed" to have sex with them. > > Cairns-based District Court judge Sarah Bradley ordered that the six > teenage juveniles not even have a conviction recorded for the 2005 > offence, and that they be placed on a 12-month probation order. > > Judge Bradley sentenced three men over the age of consent of 16 - > aged 17, 18 and 26 - to six months' imprisonment, with the sentence > suspended for 12 months. > > Because the 28-day appeal period has expired, the sentences cannot be altered. > > Judge Bradley said from her Cairns home yesterday that she considered > the sentences "appropriate" in the case because they were the > penalties asked for by the Crown prosecutor. > > ========================= > from an email exchange last year following the court case: > > ======== >>So ... they don't have any minimum age of consent? > > I'm sure they must have. But it's a hierarchical male-brutalized > sub-society at the end of its tether. > > The article depicts a terminal "behavioral sink" with the top rats > picking with impunity on the lower rats, Hey! That's what we've set up for prisons here. How interesting! > but everyone seething with > barely controlled fury, ready to kill each other, so the judge tried > not to inflame the brain-damaged lunatics. Not good law, but maybe > workable politics. From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 22 00:24:26 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:24:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Lee wrote: > > If we examine the piecemeal actual causes, we see that those > people are in no way permitted (or find it impossible) to maintain > the same traditional culture that worked better for them. The > Americans tried another approach, locking up their aboriginals on > reservations, free to practice whatever traditional ways they wanted > to (though I confess they didn't get good hunting land, in general). > But new technology and new drugs sneaked in anyway. With > similar, but not so extreme results. (Probably because the American > Indians were already at a rather higher level of technology and > civilization than the Australian aborigines.) I kinda think there was more to it than that. In the USA, IIUC, missionaries were often sent to start schools and remove the children from their native culture and convert them. The children (from what I've read) were not permitted to speak their native tongue, nor wear their native clothing, nor learn their native history/arts/culture/religion. Did that work "better"? What is "better"? From what point of view? Perplexing. Or perhaps all that is Political Correct Speak about the Evil White Men. ? Regards, MB From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Mar 22 00:37:40 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:37:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com><26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <277001c88b48$3a59f7e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <00ef01c88bb4$efa9dcc0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Lee Corbin" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 4:39 AM >> My stepdaughter (who sports white skin and wavy blonde hair - as a baby >> she >> was absolutely tow-headed) is 3/4 white and 1/4 black. Were you to meet >> her, there's no way you'd think she was anything but "white." > > I'll bet that a *lot* of the reason is due to the color of her skin. So you would consider her "white?" >> I'm confused about what you meant by "coloration." > Just that. So you would consider her "white?" >> Are you saying that a person is considered "black" as long as there >> is some evidence (i.e., physical difference from "whites") of this from >> his/her appearance? > > In most countries, this is true. In the U.S., and I think in Oceania, > white people are so deemed chiefly because they have very light > colored skin (even compared to Japanese women, to the great > consternation of the late 19th century Japanese). They also have > other obvious outward physical markers, such as thin noses and > with more of a tendency towards dolichocephalism. So you would consider her "white?" >> The reason my stepdaughter is considered "black" is due to the racist >> "one-drop" rule - it has nothing to do with her appearance (or >> coloration). This is not MY rule. It's just the rule - and that is how people get classified (when things like college admissions, certain scholarships, etc. are involved). > Really. And just how do people on the street know her family > history. As they say here, can't she easily "pass for white"? > Unless you're not being entirely forthcoming about her appearance. Who said people on the street know her family history? I neither said it nor implied anything of the kind. I quess I don't understand what you're saying here. And she doesn't just *easily* pass for "white" - she does it ALL the time. > But I'm eager to learn: is there some kind of official classification > where she lives, like there used to be in South Africa (and, for all > I know, still is)? I don't understand what you're saying here, either. She lives in America. She's a "quadroon" (I hate to use such terms, and would do away with them altogether if I could ...). Percentage-wise, Pushkin (Russia's beloved poet) was a lot less "black" than my daughter (he's an "octoroon"). Having been reared in a Russian family, I was always told he was a "black man" ("neg'r" in Russian). Disclaimer (of sorts): I have no idea why or how the world works. I'm just trying to crawl my way through the chaos. Olga From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 01:40:23 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:40:23 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Legalizing Prostitution? {Terry} In-Reply-To: <8CA5987A8B1422E-1598-1324@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5987A8B1422E-1598-1324@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: On 22/03/2008, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > > "Do US politicians not believe in evolution? I thought that even in the > US that is a minority position, especially among those with a > University education. Even the Pope believes in evolution! > > -Stathis Papaioannou > _________________ > > Are you serious? If the Pope believes in evolution why that would be a > miracle of cosmic proportion! Pope Benedict commented that the debate between "creationism" and evolution was an "absurdity". Basically, most Christian churches have understood that you can't say the Earth is flat and expect to be taken seriously: "They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other," the pope said. "This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such." (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/) Protestant fundamentalism (originating mostly in the US) are an anomaly. In fact, even Islam for the most part tries to argue that religion is consistent with scientific facts. It is interesting that "Islamic creationism" is a relatively recent development, influenced by American creationism: "The center of the Islamic creationist movement is Turkey where polemics against the theory of evolution have been waged by the Nurculuk movement of Said Nursi since the late 1970s. At present, its main exponent is the writer Harun Yahya (pseudonym of Adnan Oktar) who uses the Internet as one of the main methods for the propagation of his ideas. His BAV (Bilim Ara?t?rma Vakf?/ Science Research Foundation) organizes conferences with leading American creationists. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_creationism) Creationists are so out of touch with reality that even the kooks think they're kooks. -- Stathis Papaioannou From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 01:51:23 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:51:23 +1100 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: On 22/03/2008, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > At 11:53 PM 3/20/2008, Anne wrote: > > >Well, given some of the attitudes I've come across as of late, if > >humans did end up meeting intelligent aliens at any point, there > >would be groups of humans insisting that regardless of the fact that > >the aliens were perfectly happy the way they were, they ought to be > >coercively modified on the basis that they "don't know what they're > >missing" on account of not being human. You know, because it's > >"compassionate" and all. Blech. > > > Can you please provide examples of what attitudes you are referring > to which is fueling your gas? > > I meet humans on a daily basis who want me to conform to their > wet-wiring; but it is more openly religious and/or political than > veiled by compassion. I think Anne is talking about society's attitude towards people with autism. For example, see this article: http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism -- Stathis Papaioannou From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 02:02:47 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:02:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race is arbitrary {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA59D7F5A7BCCA-DB4-2975@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> " Terry writes > Race as a word is arbitrary {based on random whim not on reason} used for convenience of communication, not an absolute or permanent condition as the nature of thought and feelings are temporary. When the weather center predicts a storm, it gives an approximation of the weather condition subject to change moment to moment. . > We do not see thoughts of race or abstract ideas as movements of the > mind/brain. MRI showed brains are impacted by emotions or what is going > in the structure of the brain during periods of stress. One who clings > to the idea of race superiority or whatever feels stressful when he/she > is challenged. Lee: "What do you mean, exactly, by "race superiority"? If you mean "excel at certain activities", then it's their adversaries who feel stressful when presented with the facts. Face it, it's going to be a long time before many Chinese, despite their numerosity, can run as fast as Kenyans. And Eskimos? They're just not built for it, sorry." >Thoughts like race superiority is based on the observer's whims/desires. It is convenient to generalize that above observation >but is it based on facts without prejudice or value judgement? Lee:"There is also a fact that East Asians have larger brains, *especially* relative to their body size than do Africans, just as the early 20th century scientists had calculated, before Stephen Gould and a lot of politically correct types muddied the waters and successfully hit the truth ("for fear of social consequences", I surmise). You can't hide from truths like these forever." >Not all East Asians have larger brains than Africans relative/in proportion to their body size. How do you prove that generalization? Genetic variance occur irrespective of race. Lee: "On the other hand, if you mean that some race is as superior to another as, say, chimpanzees are superior to the little animals they hunt, then I agree with you that no human race is superior to another." >I posted yesterday morning, "What makes us human?" as shown in the science documentary with that title that there are >three factors contributing to the fact that humans who shared around 98% of their DNA with the apes are superior to them >when it comes to culture, language and technology. >Some humans behave similar to apes in some instances when emotion over rides reason. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 02:35:01 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:35:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? Message-ID: <8CA59DC7642922A-DB4-2A74@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> Lee wrote: "Absolutely. On the most charitable reading, Terry might be saying that cryonics is the only preservation of human beings considered one-by-one as they die, but like John, I doubt that this was all that Terry meant." > Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen as > competing with it. Certainly not, I agree totally. In this wise, cryonics is best described as a scientific hypothesis. No one I've ever heard says that cryonics is salvation because some angel told them so, or that it's got the backing of a deity. On the contrary. You'll also never find a cryonicist---unlike the religious types---ever claiming to know that it will work with 100% probability. > A handful of scientists with rather limited funds have worked very hard > to get cryonics where it is now (and it still has a long ways to go). ___________ Hi, I would not demean cryonics as a cult but since you described cryonics as a scientific hypothesis/theory where are the supporting evidence/facts that can be tested to work as proposed by your theory? The proposition it would work five hundred years from now is a mere guess. Why wait that long if you cannot test it now? Genetic engineering has been successful in many scientific experiments why not cryonics? If you can show the success now, I imagine you would get a lot of funding from all sources both private and public. Terry Terry From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 02:09:59 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:09:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803181718p4a6fbb2dw9c73baa5069500b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803220239.m2M2clm9007238@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of PJ Manney ... > > Come on America! We have not yet begun to explore the > depths of bad > > taste in public entertainment. We have not yet viewed in prime > > time... Best Hooker Ever... spike > > You need to watch more TV, Spike. > > First, there was "Temptation Island", where the pros... I > mean, contestants... did everything but have a pimp. Unless > you consider the producers the pimps... I certainly did. ... > PJ Ja. Since my son was born, my TV time has been Bob the Builder, Thomas the Tank Engine, JJ the Jet Plane, Elmo, etc. Last week we turned off the cable service, having viewed about 3 to 4 hours of cable since he was born 21 months ago. spike From hkhenson at rogers.com Sat Mar 22 02:04:06 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:04:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans Message-ID: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> I wonder if anyone can make a good argument against this thesis. Humans effectively eat oil. The huge growth in the population has come at the expense of many calories of fossil energy used for irrigating, plowing, fertilizing and transporting food. An interesting metric is that it takes a thousand tons of water to grow a ton of grain. How we got to this condition is a really interesting subject, I can't recommend Dr. Clark's work highly enough, particularly his "obvious in retrospect" comments on diminishing returns. But the near term consequences are an even more interesting topic. We are all keenly aware of peak oil. Now New Scientist (Jan 19-25) has an article that makes the case for peak coal in a relatively short time span (25 years). Unless a major new source of energy is brought on line in the next few decades, there is going to be one heck of a die off, ultimately because there are just too many people for the resources available, particularly energy. Of course the singularity (nanotech and AI) throws a spanner into predicting anything out that far. However if it fails to come through in time, there is going to be one heck of a die off with attendant problems for the ones who live through these times. As some of you know, I have been working on a pre singularity solution to the energy problems (power sats). Unfortunately, my efforts are not likely to accomplish much. Keith From amara at amara.com Sat Mar 22 03:07:36 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:07:36 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Fungus uses gamma-rays as an energy source Message-ID: A news item last week that has *interesting* astrobiological implications- A fungus that was found inside the Chernobyl reactor sarcophagus apparently uses gamma rays as an energy source. Discussed further at these blogs: http://unitedcats.wordpress.com/2007/05/29/major-biological-discoveryinside-the-chernobyl-reactor/ http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20070422222547data_trunc_sys.shtml Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 03:08:32 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:08:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <29666bf30803212008xb42cd41jb225bb5fcb29fb8c@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 5:24 PM, MB wrote: > I kinda think there was more to it than that. In the USA, IIUC, missionaries were > often sent to start schools and remove the children from their native culture and > convert them. The children (from what I've read) were not permitted to speak their > native tongue, nor wear their native clothing, nor learn their native > history/arts/culture/religion. Although Damien could explain this in better detail, the same thing happened in Australia. It was called the "Stolen Generations": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generation Government agencies removed Aboriginal children from their families to be raised in "white" orphanages or foster homes from the 1860's until the 1970's. Just last month, the new Australian PM issued a formal apology to the Stolen Generations. PJ From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 03:06:44 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:06:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318192228.02549640@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803220335.m2M3ZWlk022295@andromeda.ziaspace.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: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:24 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies > > At 06:19 PM 3/18/2008 -0500, BB wrote: > > >I am trying to figure out why Clarke > >didn't do cryonics. > > He told me it was in part because so many of his friends were > dead, and he couldn't bear the idea of going on without them. > He was tremendously upset when his dog died some years ago. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 03:12:12 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:12:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] You are our future, little extremophiles In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803181746g5d27a351u91666584710c86a8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803220341.m2M3f17F019019@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Bryan Bishop > wrote: > > On that note, any other scifi bands out there worth mentioning? > Donald Fagen Solo (Half of Steely Dan, from 1982. For those who were there then, this was a really cool song. I still like it 26 yrs later.) I.G.Y. Standing tough under stars and stripes We can tell This dream's in sight You've got to admit it At this point in time that it's clear The future looks bright On that train all graphite and glitter Undersea by rail Ninety minutes from New York to Paris Well by seventy-six we'll be A.O.K. What a beautiful world this will be What a glorious time to be free Get your ticket to that wheel in space While there's time The fix is in You'll be a witness to that game of chance in the sky You know we've got to win Here at home we'll play in the city Powered by the sun Perfect weather for a streamlined world There'll be spandex jackets one for everyone What a beautiful world this will be What a glorious time to be free On that train all graphite and glitter Undersea by rail Ninety minutes from New York to Paris (More leisure time for artists everywhere) A just machine to make big decisions Programmed by fellows with compassion and vision We'll be clean when their work is done We'll be eternally free yes and eternally young What a beautiful world this will be What a glorious time to be free From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 04:10:18 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:10:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <470a3c520803190032j7e03674fsa38735cced8a9877@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803220412.m2M4CQqM019889@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 12:32 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies > > When I was about five or six, to keep me quiet on the beach, > my mother gave me a book of Sir Arthur C. Clarke to read. I > became immediately interested in science and the future, and > I have been a transhumanist ever since. Thanks to my mother, > and thanks to Sir Arthur. > > I think many transhumanists have similar stories to tell. I > think we should build a web memorial to Sir Arthur, with > quotes of people who became scientists, engineers, and > transhumanists due to the inspiration they found in his works. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 04:15:47 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:15:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] FW: Arthur C. Clarke dies Message-ID: <200803220418.m2M4HtYR002238@andromeda.ziaspace.com> ... > > > > When I was about five or six, to keep me quiet on the > beach, my mother > > gave me a book of Sir Arthur C. Clarke to read. I became > immediately > > interested in science and the future, and I have been a > transhumanist > > ever since. Thanks to my mother, and thanks to Sir Arthur. > > > > I think many transhumanists have similar stories to tell. I > think we > > should build a web memorial to Sir Arthur, with quotes of > people who > > became scientists, engineers, and transhumanists due to the > > inspiration they found in his works. Sir Arthur inspired me to be a science fan and rocket scientist. His Profiles of the Future was a mind blower. The 2001 series was inspirational, as was the Rama Rendezvous. His influence is hard to estimate, as he was so involved in the earliest books I remember reading back in the 60s. spike From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Sat Mar 22 05:12:29 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:12:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <576055.25777.qm@web56509.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > I think Anne is talking about society's attitude towards people with > autism. For example, see this article: > http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism Bingo. And also, if anyone does read that article and the comments attached to it, you should also read the following (from Amanda's blog): http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=258 http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=294 http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=462 http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=50 http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=293 http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=90 I'm not up for a big mailing list debate right now about anything and I'm actually sort of sorry I posted the comment I did last night, seeing as if I write something like that, people have every right and reason to ask for specific examples. But for starters: I can at least point to the principle identified in common parlance as "procreative beneficence". This is a view shared by Peter Singer and several others, and it suggests that parents have an obligation to bring into being the child capable of leading the "best possible life". However, ideas of what configurations allow this "best possible life" are often unthinkingly shaped by social norms that in actuality may have little to do with a person's intrinsic capacity for leading a good and reasonable life. I sometimes feel like I can't so much as defend the right of a deaf person to refuse a cochlear implant (or to not select *against* a deaf embryo) without being told that I'm advocating letting people run around injecting themselves full of arsenic (something which I would guess even libertarians would try to discourage if it was their brother doing it, even if they wouldn't want a law against it), or purposely giving their kids cancer. It just boggles the mind how great some people's tendency toward "busybody" monitoring of other people's configuration choices is. E.g., if I can be allowed the indulgence of picking on James Hughes for a moment (which I'm sure he's used to from me on this subject), he wrote in "Citizen Cyborg" that (see pages 250-251): "For instance, autism is a brain disorder one of whose symptoms is an inability to understand or interpret other people's feelings. Although the autistic can have wonderful compensatory savant abilities, just as with blindness and other disabilities, society has an obligation to ensure that as few people as possible suffer from this disability, and that we try to find a cure." Now, to be totally fair, Hughes has adjusted his views on autism specifically somewhat (though I would really love it if he'd re-write that section of the book if he ever does a 10th Anniversary reprint or something, because it makes my skin crawl even to look at that particular section) over the past few years. Another example: from the Google News archive, an article on homosexuality in Time magazine (1965) entitled "Homosexuality Can Be Cured" included the following text: "One reason why homosexuals are so rarely cured is that they rarely try treatment. Too many of them actually believe that they are happy and satisfied the way they are." Another article on homosexuality from Time (1966) entitled "The Homosexual In America" stated much of the psychological/sociological consensus at the time as follows: "There is no denying the considerable talent of a great many homosexuals, and ideally, talent alone is what should count. But the great artists so often cited as evidence of the homosexual's creativity?the Leonardos and Michelangelos ?are probably the exceptions of genius. For the most part, thinks Los Angeles Psychiatrist Edward Stainbrook, homosexuals are failed artists, and their special creative gift a myth. No less an authority than Somerset Maugham felt that the homosexual, "however subtly he sees life, cannot see it whole," and lacks "the deep seriousness over certain things that normal men take seriously ... He has small power of invention, but a wonderful gift for delightful embroidery. He has vitality, brilliance, but seldom strength."" (I am often astounded at the parallels between writings on homosexuality in the 1960s and writings on autism -- "functioning levels" notwithstanding -- in the 1990s-2000s, frankly.) But changing views in response to new information notwithstanding, I still think that book passage stands out as a good (albeit out of date) example of WHY I think that the sci-fi scenario of "humans meet aliens, hilarity ensues" could potentially lead to attempts at coercive modification or at least "shaming" of people who would dare to bring a "suboptimal" creature into existence. And that is to say that even highly educated people are capable of being extremely ignorant without even knowing it. This is not an insult -- it is just a fact. It isn't even a value judgment exactly -- it's more of an attempt to point out a "weak area" in how some people approach various subjects. When someone doesn't know how deep a subject goes, and they don't collide with that subject often in the course of their daily business, they are apt to assume (for the sake of sheer and understandable cognitive parsimony) that the subject simply doesn't *get* any deeper than "pop science" or superficial (and possibly outmoded) description. Nobody can be highly educated in all areas simultaneously, which means that when people are *generally* well-educated, they still maintain a large portion of their "picture of the world" on the basis of media fictions, distortions, rumors, urban legends, "pop" science, etc. This can't be helped totally, but it can be remedied in part by pooling more accurate knowledge in more visible places, and drawing attention the difficulties in distinguishing a subject's facts from its collected mythologies in a venue at least passingly as accessible to the casual learner as mass media is. So, in other words, there are a lot of smart, well-educated people in the world who presently believe that huge numbers of perfectly happy and capable (albeit not in "typical" ways necessarily) are in fact suffering for the mere fact of existing and being configured as they are. Hence, if Earth were visited by a cadre of humanoid-looking aliens whose Shiny Gadget Level was approximately equal to ours, but who were all non-hearing (and who didn't see any reason why they should be hearing, and who had perfectly workable non-audio communication systems, etc.), I could see many humans at the very least feeling as if they had a moral duty to feel sorry for the aliens, seeing as they would never be able to enjoy opera or the sound of a river or what-have-you. - Anne "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 08:20:08 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:20:08 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 2:04 AM, hkhenson wrote: > But the near term consequences are an even more interesting > topic. We are all keenly aware of peak oil. Now New Scientist (Jan > 19-25) has an article that makes the case for peak coal in a > relatively short time span (25 years). > > Unless a major new source of energy is brought on line in the next > few decades, there is going to be one heck of a die off, ultimately > because there are just too many people for the resources available, > particularly energy. > > Of course the singularity (nanotech and AI) throws a spanner into > predicting anything out that far. However if it fails to come > through in time, there is going to be one heck of a die off with > attendant problems for the ones who live through these times. > That was last month's ecological panic. This month it is water shortages. 6 February 2008 ? Many of today's conflicts around the world are being fuelled or exacerbated by water shortages and climate change is only making the situation worse, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the General Assembly today. BillK From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Sat Mar 22 07:55:07 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 03:55:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <576055.25777.qm@web56509.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Anne, I remember commenting a while back about how autistics have a different perspective but that does not mean that it is the right perspective. If you want to limit yourself by using autistic as an excuse, go ahead. Everybody has flaws. I choose not to name my own. The more you determine yourself based on your flaws is the reason you will choose not to be open-minded. One perspective within a small group does not compare to a large range of overall behaviour. I've read a lot that you have posted and find your postings highly educational although I respect that you have a need to help others in your particular state, it is not the majority. Sometimes going outside the norm with an open mind can lead you to bigger and better perspectives. Just an opinion Anna Anna --- Anne Corwin wrote: > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > I think Anne is talking about society's attitude > towards people with > > autism. For example, see this article: > > > > http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism > > Bingo. > > And also, if anyone does read that article and the > comments attached to it, you should also read the > following (from Amanda's blog): > > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=258 > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=294 > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=462 > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=50 > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=293 > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=90 > > I'm not up for a big mailing list debate right now > about anything and I'm actually sort of sorry I > posted the comment I did last night, seeing as if I > write something like that, people have every right > and reason to ask for specific examples. > > But for starters: I can at least point to the > principle identified in common parlance as > "procreative beneficence". This is a view shared by > Peter Singer and several others, and it suggests > that parents have an obligation to bring into being > the child capable of leading the "best possible > life". However, ideas of what configurations allow > this "best possible life" are often unthinkingly > shaped by social norms that in actuality may have > little to do with a person's intrinsic capacity for > leading a good and reasonable life. > > I sometimes feel like I can't so much as defend the > right of a deaf person to refuse a cochlear implant > (or to not select *against* a deaf embryo) without > being told that I'm advocating letting people run > around injecting themselves full of arsenic > (something which I would guess even libertarians > would try to discourage if it was their brother > doing it, even if they wouldn't want a law against > it), or purposely giving their kids cancer. It just > boggles the mind how great some people's tendency > toward "busybody" monitoring of other people's > configuration choices is. > > E.g., if I can be allowed the indulgence of picking > on James Hughes for a moment (which I'm sure he's > used to from me on this subject), he wrote in > "Citizen Cyborg" that (see pages 250-251): > > "For instance, autism is a brain disorder one of > whose symptoms is an inability to understand or > interpret other people's feelings. Although the > autistic can have wonderful compensatory savant > abilities, just as with blindness and other > disabilities, society has an obligation to ensure > that as few people as possible suffer from this > disability, and that we try to find a cure." > > Now, to be totally fair, Hughes has adjusted his > views on autism specifically somewhat (though I > would really love it if he'd re-write that section > of the book if he ever does a 10th Anniversary > reprint or something, because it makes my skin crawl > even to look at that particular section) over the > past few years. > > Another example: from the Google News archive, an > article on homosexuality in Time magazine (1965) > entitled "Homosexuality Can Be Cured" included the > following text: > > "One reason why homosexuals are so rarely cured is > that they rarely try treatment. Too many of them > actually believe that they are happy and satisfied > the way they are." > > Another article on homosexuality from Time (1966) > entitled "The Homosexual In America" stated much of > the psychological/sociological consensus at the time > as follows: > > "There is no denying the considerable talent of a > great many homosexuals, and ideally, talent alone > is what should count. But the great artists so > often cited as evidence of the homosexual's > creativity?the Leonardos and Michelangelos ?are > probably the exceptions of genius. For the most > part, thinks Los Angeles Psychiatrist Edward > Stainbrook, homosexuals are failed artists, and > their special creative gift a myth. No less an > authority than Somerset Maugham felt that the > homosexual, "however subtly he sees life, cannot > see it whole," and lacks "the deep seriousness over > certain things that normal men take seriously ... He > has small power of invention, but a wonderful gift > for delightful embroidery. He has vitality, > brilliance, but seldom strength."" > > (I am often astounded at the parallels between > writings on homosexuality in the 1960s and writings > on autism -- "functioning levels" notwithstanding -- > in the 1990s-2000s, frankly.) > > But changing views in response to new information > notwithstanding, I still think that book passage > stands out as a good (albeit out of date) example of > WHY I think that the sci-fi scenario of "humans meet > aliens, hilarity ensues" could potentially lead to > attempts at coercive modification or at least > "shaming" of people who would dare to bring a > "suboptimal" creature into existence. > > And that is to say that even highly educated people > are capable of being extremely ignorant without even > knowing it. This is not an insult -- it is just a > fact. It isn't even a value judgment exactly -- > it's more of an attempt to point out a "weak area" > in how some people approach various subjects. When > someone doesn't know how deep a subject goes, and > they don't collide with that subject often in the > course of their daily business, they are apt to > assume (for the sake of sheer and understandable > cognitive parsimony) that the subject simply doesn't > *get* any deeper than "pop science" or superficial > (and possibly outmoded) description. > > Nobody can be highly educated in all areas > simultaneously, which means that when people are > *generally* well-educated, they still maintain a > large portion of their "picture of the world" on the > basis of media fictions, distortions, rumors, urban > legends, "pop" science, etc. This can't be helped > totally, but it can be remedied in part by pooling > more accurate knowledge in more visible places, and > drawing attention the difficulties in distinguishing > a subject's facts from its collected mythologies in > a venue at least passingly as accessible to the > casual learner as mass media is. > > So, in other words, there are a lot of smart, > well-educated people in the world who presently > believe that huge numbers of perfectly happy and > capable (albeit not in "typical" ways necessarily) > are in fact suffering for the mere fact of existing > and being configured as they are. > > Hence, if Earth were visited by a cadre of > humanoid-looking aliens whose Shiny Gadget Level was > approximately equal to ours, but who were all > non-hearing (and who didn't see any reason why they > should be hearing, and who had perfectly workable > non-audio communication systems, etc.), I could see > many humans at the very least feeling as if they had > a moral duty to feel sorry for the aliens, seeing as > they would never be able to enjoy opera or the sound > of a river or what-have-you. > > - Anne > > > "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" > - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" > > --------------------------------- > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them > fast with Yahoo! Search.> _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/ From jedwebb at hotmail.com Sat Mar 22 10:11:29 2008 From: jedwebb at hotmail.com (Jeremy Webb) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:11:29 +0000 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <576055.25777.qm@web56509.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Autism is an inbreeding related disorder... Don't shag your fifth cousin, that's what I say! :0) Jeremy "Unpooftah" Webb - Heathen Oath Vitki> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 03:55:07 -0400> From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> Subject: Re: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race?> > Anne, I remember commenting a while back about how> autistics have a different perspective but that does> not mean that it is the right perspective. If you> want to limit yourself by using autistic as an excuse,> go ahead. Everybody has flaws. I choose not to name> my own. The more you determine yourself based on your> flaws is the reason you will choose not to be> open-minded. One perspective within a small group> does not compare to a large range of overall> behaviour. I've read a lot that you have posted and> find your postings highly educational although I> respect that you have a need to help others in your> particular state, it is not the majority. Sometimes> going outside the norm with an open mind can lead you> to bigger and better perspectives.> > Just an opinion> Anna> > > > Anna> > --- Anne Corwin wrote:> > > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote:> > > I think Anne is talking about society's attitude> > towards people with> > > autism. For example, see this article:> > > > >> >> http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism> > > > Bingo. > > > > And also, if anyone does read that article and the> > comments attached to it, you should also read the> > following (from Amanda's blog):> > > > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=258> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=294> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=462> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=50> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=293> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=90> > > > I'm not up for a big mailing list debate right now> > about anything and I'm actually sort of sorry I> > posted the comment I did last night, seeing as if I> > write something like that, people have every right> > and reason to ask for specific examples. > > > > But for starters: I can at least point to the> > principle identified in common parlance as> > "procreative beneficence". This is a view shared by> > Peter Singer and several others, and it suggests> > that parents have an obligation to bring into being> > the child capable of leading the "best possible> > life". However, ideas of what configurations allow> > this "best possible life" are often unthinkingly> > shaped by social norms that in actuality may have> > little to do with a person's intrinsic capacity for> > leading a good and reasonable life.> > > > I sometimes feel like I can't so much as defend the> > right of a deaf person to refuse a cochlear implant> > (or to not select *against* a deaf embryo) without> > being told that I'm advocating letting people run> > around injecting themselves full of arsenic> > (something which I would guess even libertarians> > would try to discourage if it was their brother> > doing it, even if they wouldn't want a law against> > it), or purposely giving their kids cancer. It just> > boggles the mind how great some people's tendency> > toward "busybody" monitoring of other people's> > configuration choices is.> > > > E.g., if I can be allowed the indulgence of picking> > on James Hughes for a moment (which I'm sure he's> > used to from me on this subject), he wrote in> > "Citizen Cyborg" that (see pages 250-251):> > > > "For instance, autism is a brain disorder one of> > whose symptoms is an inability to understand or> > interpret other people's feelings. Although the> > autistic can have wonderful compensatory savant> > abilities, just as with blindness and other> > disabilities, society has an obligation to ensure> > that as few people as possible suffer from this> > disability, and that we try to find a cure."> > > > Now, to be totally fair, Hughes has adjusted his> > views on autism specifically somewhat (though I> > would really love it if he'd re-write that section> > of the book if he ever does a 10th Anniversary> > reprint or something, because it makes my skin crawl> > even to look at that particular section) over the> > past few years. > > > > Another example: from the Google News archive, an> > article on homosexuality in Time magazine (1965)> > entitled "Homosexuality Can Be Cured" included the> > following text:> > > > "One reason why homosexuals are so rarely cured is> > that they rarely try treatment. Too many of them> > actually believe that they are happy and satisfied> > the way they are."> > > > Another article on homosexuality from Time (1966)> > entitled "The Homosexual In America" stated much of> > the psychological/sociological consensus at the time> > as follows:> > > > "There is no denying the considerable talent of a> > great many homosexuals, and ideally, talent alone> > is what should count. But the great artists so> > often cited as evidence of the homosexual's> > creativity?the Leonardos and Michelangelos ?are> > probably the exceptions of genius. For the most> > part, thinks Los Angeles Psychiatrist Edward> > Stainbrook, homosexuals are failed artists, and> > their special creative gift a myth. No less an> > authority than Somerset Maugham felt that the> > homosexual, "however subtly he sees life, cannot> > see it whole," and lacks "the deep seriousness over> > certain things that normal men take seriously ... He> > has small power of invention, but a wonderful gift> > for delightful embroidery. He has vitality,> > brilliance, but seldom strength.""> > > > (I am often astounded at the parallels between> > writings on homosexuality in the 1960s and writings> > on autism -- "functioning levels" notwithstanding --> > in the 1990s-2000s, frankly.)> > > > But changing views in response to new information> > notwithstanding, I still think that book passage> > stands out as a good (albeit out of date) example of> > WHY I think that the sci-fi scenario of "humans meet> > aliens, hilarity ensues" could potentially lead to> > attempts at coercive modification or at least> > "shaming" of people who would dare to bring a> > "suboptimal" creature into existence. > > > > And that is to say that even highly educated people> > are capable of being extremely ignorant without even> > knowing it. This is not an insult -- it is just a> > fact. It isn't even a value judgment exactly --> > it's more of an attempt to point out a "weak area"> > in how some people approach various subjects. When> > someone doesn't know how deep a subject goes, and> > they don't collide with that subject often in the> > course of their daily business, they are apt to> > assume (for the sake of sheer and understandable> > cognitive parsimony) that the subject simply doesn't> > *get* any deeper than "pop science" or superficial> > (and possibly outmoded) description.> > > > Nobody can be highly educated in all areas> > simultaneously, which means that when people are> > *generally* well-educated, they still maintain a> > large portion of their "picture of the world" on the> > basis of media fictions, distortions, rumors, urban> > legends, "pop" science, etc. This can't be helped> > totally, but it can be remedied in part by pooling> > more accurate knowledge in more visible places, and> > drawing attention the difficulties in distinguishing> > a subject's facts from its collected mythologies in> > a venue at least passingly as accessible to the> > casual learner as mass media is. > > > > So, in other words, there are a lot of smart,> > well-educated people in the world who presently> > believe that huge numbers of perfectly happy and> > capable (albeit not in "typical" ways necessarily)> > are in fact suffering for the mere fact of existing> > and being configured as they are. > > > > Hence, if Earth were visited by a cadre of> > humanoid-looking aliens whose Shiny Gadget Level was> > approximately equal to ours, but who were all> > non-hearing (and who didn't see any reason why they> > should be hearing, and who had perfectly workable> > non-audio communication systems, etc.), I could see> > many humans at the very least feeling as if they had> > a moral duty to feel sorry for the aliens, seeing as> > they would never be able to enjoy opera or the sound> > of a river or what-have-you. > > > > - Anne> > > > > > "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!"> > - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time"> > > > ---------------------------------> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them> > fast with Yahoo! Search.>> _______________________________________________> > extropy-chat mailing list> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat> > > > > > __________________________________________________________________> Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/> _______________________________________________> extropy-chat mailing list> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat _________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the next generation of Windows Live http://www.windowslive.co.uk/get-live -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 12:37:02 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:37:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] We are all a process of change. {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA5A3090463ABA-528-19B7@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> Lee writes: "Yikes! I've been warning "radical uploaders" since 1990 or 91 in an article in the Immortalist by that name. If you choose (even willingly and in full knowledge) any path of personal evolutionary development that fails to provide for earlier versions of you to also get a little runtime, then you're just committing suicide in a brand new way. I'm shocked that even folks like Ralph Merkle (conversation) years ago didn't see any danger here. ____________ Hi, why cling to thoughts of a person or a version of you? Thoughts come and go as the nature of movements or change. Memes and genes do not commit suicide for their nature is to change or mutate randomly. Thoughts of suicide are thoughts arising from an egoistic desire/attachment to an idea of a self or hatred of a self which does not exist except as a thought. Attachment to thoughts cause psychological suffering because the nature of thoughts/beliefs is change/ impermanence. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 13:08:40 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:08:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C. Message-ID: <8CA5A34FBC85A0C-528-1A74@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> A thought: ""you can't get the people back on the farms again", as I think is said here, and now that they've heard of the features of modern society and technology, and find many of them appealing, there won't be any stopping them from getting the ones they want. On a positive note, the "treatment" that the aborigines has received from the European colonists was far better than that usually afforded historically. Any local nuisance population vastly inferior in technology was quickly eradicated without a qualm. > The difference, you might reply, is that *we* start with a > cosmopolitan sense of the contingency of our own culture, > a trained capacity to adapt to change. Maybe." ________________ Hi, you all are thoughts caught in spacetime which no longer exist except in the past and now being reincarnated causing mental conflicts, ironically. Adaptability to change is a desire/an error in thinking for we are all a process of change. What is the past or future is a mind construct clinging to an imagined time. Where is time? Is'nt that another thought? Actually, how can change occur in time when we are caught with thoughts of past and future? Can we reverse time as some fantastic idea of a time travel? Well we don't have time to wait for we are time itself. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 13:39:25 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:39:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C. Message-ID: <8CA5A3947459744-528-1B48@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> MB writes: "In the USA, IIUC, missionaries were often sent to start schools and remove the children from their native culture and convert them. The children (from what I've read) were not permitted to speak their native tongue, nor wear their native clothing, nor learn their native history/arts/culture/religion. Did that work "better"? What is "better"? From what point of view? Perplexing. Or perhaps all that is Political Correct Speak about the Evil White Men. ? Regards, MB _____________ A perplexing thought, indeed. Why so? The desire to change arise from ignorance/misperception. What works is the movement of the mind/brain moment to moment without a thinker or a controller, a permanent being. The only thing that is permanent in our universe is change. Who control change? Can the eye see the eye? Change is a process of interdependencies of the four forces of nature. The holy grail is to unite the gravitational force with quantum mechanics. We are not there yet as some cryonics said it would take 500 years to do that. I won't bet on such a theory if you call it a theory. A theory like gravity is a working hypothesis. We don't see gravity but can see the effects of that force as seen by direct observation. So far the four forces of nature work in our four dimentional universe including time. Time as a moment to moment change that's us. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 14:09:11 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:09:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Energy are us {E=mc2} Message-ID: <8CA5A3D700CE9A7-528-1C26@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> Keith writes: "Unless a major new source of energy is brought on line in the next few decades, there is going to be one heck of a die off, ultimately because there are just too many people for the resources available, particularly energy. Of course the singularity (nanotech and AI) throws a spanner into predicting anything out that far. However if it fails to come through in time, there is going to be one heck of a die off with attendant problems for the ones who live through these times. As some of you know, I have been working on a pre singularity solution to the energy problems (power sats). Unfortunately, my efforts are not likely to accomplish much. Keith ____________ Hi, since energy cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed from one form or another, why feel sad or think otherwise? That form of energy which you think can be depleted is a thought. I don't see any depletion of thoughts in nanotech. Singularity in physics and mathematical language is a point which takes an infinite value i.e. a black hole. A black hole swallows energy and where did that energy go? If we cannot harness that energy swallowed by a black hole, then are we in trouble? Terry From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 22 14:21:44 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:21:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: References: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <33808.12.77.168.186.1206195704.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Natasha: >> Can you please provide examples of what attitudes you are referring >> to which is fueling your gas? >> >> I meet humans on a daily basis who want me to conform to their >> wet-wiring; but it is more openly religious and/or political than >> veiled by compassion. Stathis: > > I think Anne is talking about society's attitude towards people with > autism. For example, see this article: > > http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism > > Not just autism, IMHO. Any "difference" might be declared an "disorder" or "syndrome" and be "fixed" somehow. F'rinstance, melancholy people could receive antidepressants so they'll be all "happy" and "smiling" like everybody else. Bummer, I say. There are differences and they often make the world an interesting place. Not everyone is Extroverted Social Togetherness Party types. Sorry for all the scare quotes.... they're sarcastic-voice indicators. Regards, MB From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 22 14:30:10 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:30:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices In-Reply-To: <200803220239.m2M2clm9007238@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803220239.m2M2clm9007238@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <33816.12.77.168.186.1206196210.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> spike writes: > > Ja. Since my son was born, my TV time has been Bob the Builder, Thomas the > Tank Engine, JJ the Jet Plane, Elmo, etc. Last week we turned off the cable > service, having viewed about 3 to 4 hours of cable since he was born 21 > months ago. > You've probably done the right thing. The internet is much more interactive and thought provoking, and I'm sure Isaac is infinitely more interesting than an TV program! Also, he'll learn to amuse himself better without the BoobTubeBabysitter. Lego, Clay, Crayons, playing in a sandbox, helping to cook, just running around outdoors - all these are exciting and fun things for him to do. :) And for quiet times there's always reading - IMHO the absolute Number One Best! Regards, MB From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 15:07:49 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:07:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Desires of Immortality {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA5A45A0875284-1698-B48@FWM-D41.sysops.aol.com> Desires of immortality arise from memes and genetic processes of interactions. Desires are neither right nor wrong. Some memes/culture suppress some desires for fear of punishment or in anticipation of a reward, another mistake in thinking. Genetic variations are seen as abnormalities like autism and some society feel pity on the individual with autism by projecting their idea of happiness or suffering as universal truth. Thoughts or ideas of happiness or suffering are movements of the mind being fed by memes. Let me quote a Zen master, Hsueh-Yen saying: " ""One moon appears everywhere in all bodies of water; the moons in all bodies of water are contained in one moon. This is a metaphor for one mind producing myriad things and myriad things producing one mind. This refers to dream illusions, flowers in the sky, half-seeming, half empty." We are thoughts produced by the movement of our minds. Dreams/thoughts have no direct connection to reality like illusions of flowers in the sky. Why did Hsueh-yen thinks that illusions are half-seeming, half empty? Is it due to an innate narcissitic tendency of an ego fed by thoughts of a self? Brain cells die and genes mutate which one are you? Thoughts come and go and some memories/thoughts imprinted in the brain die along with the death of some neurons as in dementia which is just a process of kinetic energy in the brain. If we cling to thoughts as if these processes are permanent, we suffer pschological distress. The prolonged mental torture cause the death of neurons and the cycle of energy undergoes changes from one physical form {aging and death]. The physical appearances of change maybe desirable or not depending on the observer [society]. If there is no observer, there is no thought/desire for happiness or aversion to suffering. Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 15:08:26 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:08:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] highly profitable sexual practices In-Reply-To: <33816.12.77.168.186.1206196210.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <200803220239.m2M2clm9007238@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <33816.12.77.168.186.1206196210.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <2d6187670803220808v4e1eff62udab4dcfef3722ddf@mail.gmail.com> MB wrote: You've probably done the right thing. The internet is much more interactive and thought provoking, and I'm sure Isaac is infinitely more interesting than an TV program! Also, he'll learn to amuse himself better without the BoobTubeBabysitter. Lego, Clay, Crayons, playing in a sandbox, helping to cook, just running around outdoors - all these are exciting and fun things for him to do. :) >>> A good point. My nephew Luc is one of those kids who will find a "non-toy" item and decide it is his favorite toy and worthy of much invested time. lol I gave my mom a sculpture of an alien Grey skull (she is a big "Coast to Coast" paranormal AM radio talk show fan) and my nephew cannot find enough time to closely examine every little nook and cranny of it. We are beginning to think he is a future medical doctor, forensics specialist, art critic or sculptor. I find it fascinating how some parents are so protective and yet others have a more open approach. Luc's mom is almost Klingon in her parenting style, which lets Luc interact with his environment under her watchful eye with only very limited mom and dad intervention. He sometimes learns the hard way, but he does learn! This kid just learned to walk but now his mode of travel is to go for very short sprints, lose his balance and crash into the hardwood floor, and then instead of crying just pick himself up and keep on doing it until he reaches his destination! It's as if he is impatient with his body for not developing fast enough! lol He doesn't exhibit fear like I've seen from some other kids his age when they are first introduced to big dogs. But then he has not had a bad experience with a dog yet. He talks to them like they understand what he's saying. When people speak to him he actually gives them his full attention for extended periods of time. It can be almost eerie! lol The pediatrician said for a boy his age he is definitely unusually big. Considering that his mom's family (despite mom being slender) has produced some really big guys who have played highschool and college football, we just might have an athlete on our hands! This is going to be so strange (uncle and dad sure don't come from an athletic family...). lol I suppose I'm a proud uncle! I think he will do just fine in this rapidly transforming and amazing world of ours (and his). John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 15:39:00 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:39:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <8CA59DC7642922A-DB4-2A74@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> References: <8CA59DC7642922A-DB4-2A74@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> Terry wrote: Hi, I would not demean cryonics as a cult but since you described cryonics as a scientific hypothesis/theory where are the supporting evidence/facts that can be tested to work as proposed by your theory? The proposition it would work five hundred years from now is a mere guess. Why wait that long if you cannot test it now? >>> Terry, cryonics is an experiment currently "in progress." And if you are signed up with a cryonics provider, then you are part of the control group! By reading up on cryonics you will find the two main cryonics organizations make no guarantees that it will succeed. I consider it an "educated person's gamble." You are right, the proposition that it will work 500 years from now is merely a guess. The people frozen may be brought back fifty years from now (a Singularity happens) or not for several millennia (freezing damage and information loss may take a truly godlike level of technology to reverse). And I realize I'm just guessing, myself! lol But the big picture is that technological progress has been both steady and amazing over the last five decades and we can expect it to continue or even exceed current rates of development with the passage of time. So, whether I have to wait fifty years or five millennia to be brought back, my body can wait it out in a dewar of liquid nitrogen. It is only when medical science can confidently attempt to bring me back from a frozen state that this experiment will reach fruition. you continue: Genetic engineering has been successful in many scientific experiments why not cryonics? If you can show the success now, I imagine you would get a lot of funding from all sources both private and public. >>> The damage to frozen human tissue is so severe at the temperatures involved in cryonics, that reversing them and restoring a person to life is *currently* totally beyond conventional science. It is the dream of cryonicists to be able to bring a frozen person back to full health and reap the social and financial rewards, but that time is still a long way off. I recommend you carefully read over the Alcor and Cryonics Institute websites to learn more. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 16:02:22 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:02:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Article: "Sexing Up UFO's" Message-ID: <2d6187670803220902jc43da0dq510065c5cb1b23b1@mail.gmail.com> An article whose thesis is worth considering... John Grigg http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/sexy_ufo.shtml Ever seen those car commercials where a young, scantily clad woman gets a shot of tactile ecstasy from merely stroking a sports car's luxurious lipstick-red exterior? You're supposed to think; "If I buy that car, then..." Then what? You'll be a chick-magnet? Not likely. It's also not likely that aliens have been visiting our planet, but you wouldn't know it from the way the science community remains mealy-mouthed or even silent on Joe Public's certainty that UFOs are visiting Earth. If pressed, both the car manufacturer and the government official will admit that the woman and the aliens are illusory. And while it's easy to understand how the woman may help boost car sales, what's in it for the science community to keep the illusion of orifice-probing aliens aloft? Despite what were considered to be major investigations into Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) sightings in the 50s, 60s and 70s, neither NASA nor the USAF have been very forthcoming one way or the other when it comes to the idea of extraterrestrials (ETs) visiting Earth. Project Blue Book, a systematic study into UFOs, was initiated by the USAF in 1952, and eventually terminated in 1970, after no evidence one way or the other was found to support a breach of natural physical laws, or the existence of alien technologies. Naturally enough, conspiracy buffs claimed that the project was dubiously managed, that data was suppressed, and that military officials continued to gather UFO data long after the project ended (there's just no pleasing some people). But even today, official attitudes toward UFOs are curiously inconsistent. So what *is* the official word? Well, recently a panel of scientists conducting an independent review concluded that UFOs are worthy of further study after all. "It may be valuable to carefully evaluate UFO reports to extract information about unusual phenomena currently unknown to science," claim the international review panel of nine physical scientists. Of course, it will all be done very tastefully, they assure us, so that "such evaluations must take place with a spirit of objectivity and a willingness to evaluate rival hypotheses." However, the panel's latest conclusions are a stark contrast to those reached by Dr. Edward U. Condon, director of the Colorado Project, in his 1968 UFO report. Back then Condon argued: "further extensive study of UFOs probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science will be advanced thereby." But barely two years after Condon's conclusions, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' Kuettner Report argued for: "a continuing, moderate-level [research] effort with emphasis on improved data collection by objective means and on high-quality scientific analysis" in regard to UFOs. With all of this official flip-flopping over the years, it looks as though they are messing with the public on the issue of UFOs ? but more on that later. You don't need to be a paid-up member on Mensa to work out how unlikely it is that aliens are visiting Earth, because making such a claim implies a number of truly remarkable things. First of all, any visiting aliens are most probably quite some distance away from Earth, at least outside of our own range of space travel or detection technologies. This may not be saying much, but it at least implies that their technology is likely a whole lot more advanced than our own. Another factor is time. Technologically advanced humans haven't been around for very long in the scheme of things; just a spec of time in the Earth's history, and our span of existence barely registers when compared to the age of the universe. So given these variables, what are the chances that (a) an alien civilization exists simultaneously within the same teensy-weensy timeframe as we humans, (b) is relatively close to Earth, and (c) intelligent enough to have the technology to reach us? Slim at best. Another seemingly good reason why we shouldn't put much stock in UFO sightings is because UFOs seem to be invariably seen by ordinary, everyday folk, rather than astronomers and other relevantly qualified persons. But of course, this rule of thumb has since been dashed, as the international panel attempting to have UFO investigations reopened is also comprised of a band of former military pilots and high-ranking officials who have their own UFO sightings to add as evidence. "It's a question of who you're going to believe: your lying eyes or the Government?" said John Callahan, a former Federal Aviation Administration investigator. Callahan alleges that the CIA tried to silence reports about an enormous luminescent ball, roughly four times the size of a jumbo jet. Either NASA, together with USAF's top brass, know something that we don't and they're keeping it hush-hush ? like Area 51 and Roswell are real ? or they're just playing with us. As I said earlier, the lack of commitment to UFO research one way or the other makes the latter far more likely ? but to what end? In some respects you could argue that the concept of Earth-visiting aliens is to science what Intelligent Design (ID) is to creationism. That is, both world-views exploit such unlikely and improbable speculations to forward scientific research and theological teaching ? though obviously in very different ways. Why, for instance, do you rarely hear scientists come out and explain how unlikely it is that intelligent civilizations are visiting Earth? Are we to assume from this silence that UFO sightings are in fact quite likely? And let's face it; scientists aren't too big to take pot shots at something they find preposterous, as evidenced by the chorus of scientific opposition to ID. Likewise, the same phenomenon that you see with scientists and UFO sightings seems to occur with respect to theologians whenever ID is raised in the public arena. Despite ID not telling the story of creation as set out in the Bible, it does allow the concept of a "creator" or "designer" to seep into the public consciousness. As a result, you can find fundamentalist Christians, creationists, and Bible literalists biting their tongues whenever ID is discussed, and even supporting moves to have ID taught in classrooms ? adopting the "students should hear all arguments" position. In their eyes, ID is a gateway to theological concepts more in line with Christian thought, and therefore a valuable tool to forward their overall religious agenda. So what message are we to take from these scientific and theological shenanigans? Ok, ID is bad because it has no grounding in science, is without foundation, and should therefore not be taught in science class. Fine. But if scientists are happy to continue letting the public believe that alien visitations are possible, then perhaps we should introduce such possibilities into the science classroom. At the very least students could put the possibility of alien visitations into some kind of perspective, instead of being left wondering about the veracity of every UFO sighting that they see, hear, or read about (UFO videos are some of the most popular items on YouTube). If the issues surrounding UFO sightings were addressed in science class, there may even be a reduction in the number of erroneous UFO sightings as people begin to have a better understanding of what it is they are seeing "Dang, Jed, that ain't no fly-in saucer, that there be a meteorite." But judging by the silence of the science community in regard to UFO sightings, educating the public about such matters is not on their agenda. But why the selectiveness? NASA spends a lot of time and money (billions, in fact) on space projects that really don't amount to much in regard to improving the human condition ? either now or in the future. In relative terms, it's like you or I irresponsibly dipping into the family budget so that we can go on a holiday to somewhere we've never visited before, because you've heard that it might be pretty or interesting, because it's there, because you can. So, much like the creationists, scientists bite their tongues when it comes to UFO sightings, because they know that as long as the public has a vested interest in our skies, then NASA will always have the public on side in regard to space project funding. Billions of dollars are nothing compared with the possibility of finding the perpetrators of all of those cattle mutilations, abductions and probings. The pointy end of this argument is that UFO sightings ? fueled by sensational media reports that go unchecked ? are tolerated by the scientific community because such incidents help cast space exploration in a worthwhile light in the eyes of the public. But just as you won't be having dinner any time soon with the gorgeous woman writhing about on the expensive red sports car, don't expect that your tax dollar investment in the space race will lead to ET dropping by for a visit. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Sat Mar 22 16:08:13 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> I don't consider autism to be a "flaw" any more than I consider, say, being female to be a "flaw". I most certainly do NOT "limit myself" or "determine myself" in totality by it. In fact, I find such a suggestion extremely smarmy and ignorant. It is not up to anyone else to decide on my behalf whether or not I am "limiting myself". You have to understand that when I use "labels" I am not using them in a manner as a person might who *wanted* to "define herself" totally by them. All they are is useful short-hand for constellations of tendencies and/or traits. I have plenty of actual flaws (as all humans do) -- I just don't consider the low-level perceptual/cognitive attributes that have been identified as "autistic" to indicate intrinsic broken-ness. You have revealed a bias that I think many people should actually be more aware of, which is to say that you seem to assume right off that something is a "flaw" just because social norms currently identify it as such. I would LOVE certain kinds of "modifications" and/or "upgrades". I am all for extending the healthy lifespan, for instance, and I think it would be pretty neat to, say, be able to see more wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. I am all for making myself, if it were possible, resistant to cancer and other actual diseases. I am all for allowing OTHER people who might be autistic or whatever to decide that they want to change those things. Additionally, I am ALWAYS working to improve skills and learn new things, to become adept with new tools, to work on picking up at least small bits of other languages, etc. If I wanted to limit myself, why would I be doing that? Please do not tell me I am limiting myself *merely* by saying I don't think I need to be nonautistic in order to be happy and/or successful. That is seriously one of my major pet peeves and it's also a generally destructive attitude I see coming from far too many people whom I'd think should know better. - Anne Anna Taylor wrote: Anne, I remember commenting a while back about how autistics have a different perspective but that does not mean that it is the right perspective. If you want to limit yourself by using autistic as an excuse, go ahead. Everybody has flaws. I choose not to name my own. The more you determine yourself based on your flaws is the reason you will choose not to be open-minded. One perspective within a small group does not compare to a large range of overall behaviour. I've read a lot that you have posted and find your postings highly educational although I respect that you have a need to help others in your particular state, it is not the majority. Sometimes going outside the norm with an open mind can lead you to bigger and better perspectives. Just an opinion Anna "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Sat Mar 22 17:14:39 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:14:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: <1206206162_10899@S4.cableone.net> At 01:20 AM 3/22/2008, you wrote: >On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 2:04 AM, hkhenson wrote: > > >That was last month's ecological panic. > >This month it is water shortages. > > >6 February 2008 ? Many of today's conflicts around the world are being >fuelled or exacerbated by water shortages and climate change is only >making the situation worse, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the >General Assembly today. All of this is due to an unsustainable population that grew to it's present size and continues to grow due to an influx of the products of relatively high technology. When that stops, the population will drop back to the level that can be sustained on local resources, in a lot of cases a very small fraction of the present population. Of course, water is just an engineering problem if you have enough energy available to pump it where you need it. With enough energy, you can pump fresh water out of sea water. And energy itself is just an engineering problem. But engineers alone can't do it, you have to have the backing of a whole society for projects on the scale needed. Keith From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Mar 22 17:24:49 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:24:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: References: <26d301c88b08$7d83fba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <224061.18827.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20080321172530.NFKL21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <20080322172248.FQCM1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> At 08:51 PM 3/21/2008, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >I think Anne is talking about society's attitude towards people with >autism. For example, see this article: > >http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism This a great article. Reactions to people with so-called disabilities have a stronghold on society. But we know that, for the most part, strong reactions stem from fear and one way to separate one seemingly healthy group from the seeming unhealthy group. A reaction to ostracize (however strongly or inadvertently) for being dissimilar, including mental, emotional, and physical abilities, may be an innate or a learned/acquired behavior. We may need to be understanding of this behavior as well because we experience even more of such reactions in the coming years as humans morph in a variety of ways. I remember working with the Home for Incurables when I was 18. I spent a few years volunteering from time to time to bring part of the outside world to people who were sequestered into an institution which gave them no interaction with the outside. It disturbed me then and still does. Ms. Baggs is yet another role model for using technology to as a mode of expression. Natasha From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 22 17:31:20 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:31:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Mike Moorcock on ACC Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322123051.026bd510@satx.rr.com> From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 17:43:53 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:43:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803221043j36a3f402nc07c117f0c6290ce@mail.gmail.com> Anne Corwin wrote: Additionally, I am ALWAYS working to improve skills and learn new things, to become adept with new tools, to work on picking up at least small bits of other languages, etc. If I wanted to limit myself, why would I be doing that? Please do not tell me I am limiting myself *merely* by saying I don't think I need to be nonautistic in order to be happy and/or successful. That is seriously one of my major pet peeves and it's also a generally destructive attitude I see coming from far too many people whom I'd think should know better. >>> This autism discussion reminds me of the discourse regarding deafness, as shown in the famous documentary, "Sound and Fury." Anne Corwin wrote: I don't consider autism to be a "flaw" any more than I consider, say, being female to be a "flaw". I most certainly do NOT "limit myself" or "determine myself" in totality by it. In fact, I find such a suggestion extremely smarmy and ignorant. It is not up to anyone else to decide on my behalf whether or not I am "limiting myself". You have to understand that when I use "labels" I am not using them in a manner as a person might who *wanted* to "define herself" totally by them. All they are is useful short-hand for constellations of tendencies and/or traits. I have plenty of actual flaws (as all humans do) -- I just don't consider the low-level perceptual/cognitive attributes that have been identified as "autistic" to indicate intrinsic broken-ness. You have revealed a bias that I think many people should actually be more aware of, which is to say that you seem to assume right off that something is a "flaw" just because social norms currently identify it as such. >>> I am learning disabled/dyslexic and definitely consider that a flaw. My sense of direction is bad (though it has improved quite a bit over the years) and it generally takes me longer than most people to master new tasks. I actually learn better from a book (its patience does not run out) than a human being who is teaching me "hands on." I have some very bitter memories of an ex-military stepdad whose explosive temper, vicious words and lack of natural affection greatly magnified my challenges. lol I think to a limited extent he still lives in my head. I used to tutor a severely autistic little boy (he had the attention span of a ferret with ADD) and I do realize, depending on the intensity of the autism, it may or may not be a problem for the person who has it. I sometimes wonder how the boy I worked with is doing now. He would be entering his teens at this point. A huge part of the reason I am pro-Transhumanism is because of my learning disabilities. I yearn for a world where such conditions can be treated/prevented and we can have a more level playing field. When people say it's God's will that I have this problem or the kid down the street should be suffering from some incurable ailment I want to pick up something very heavy and drop it on their toes... John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 17:51:52 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:51:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Mike Moorcock on ACC In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322123051.026bd510@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322123051.026bd510@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803221051p570270fcl35e8d07f2762c287@mail.gmail.com> What a touching and also very funny account of Arthur C. Clarke's life. My approach to hosting a party is similar to his own! lol Except that Clarke really was in his own laidback way, "the life of the party." John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Sat Mar 22 17:29:52 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:29:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> References: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1206207075_11972@S1.cableone.net> At 09:08 AM 3/22/2008, Anne wrote: >I don't consider autism to be a "flaw" any more than I consider, >say, being female to be a "flaw". You have clearly never had a profoundly autistic kid. I think given a choice parents would rather have a blind kid rather than one who was socially blind. Keith From hkhenson at rogers.com Sat Mar 22 17:22:02 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:22:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Energy are us {E=mc2} In-Reply-To: <8CA5A3D700CE9A7-528-1C26@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5A3D700CE9A7-528-1C26@webmail-da04.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1206206606_12114@S3.cableone.net> At 07:09 AM 3/22/2008, Terry wrote: >Keith writes: snip >Hi, since energy cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed from >one form or another, why feel sad or think otherwise? > >That form of energy which you think can be depleted is a thought. I >don't see any depletion of thoughts in nanotech. > >Singularity in physics and mathematical language is a point which takes >an infinite value i.e. a black hole. > >A black hole swallows energy and where did that energy go? If we cannot >harness that energy swallowed by a black hole, then are we in trouble? Terry, this shows such a level of physical level ignorance that I can't see where to start on it. It's clear you don't have a background in thermodynamics. How much science or engineering background do you have? I ask not to put you down, but so I can suggest what level to start repair education. Keith Henson From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 18:11:53 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:11:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080321171526.025f6a18@satx.rr.com> References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com> <26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com> <7641ddc60803211427t13b21f31p5d447523b6ebba09@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321171526.025f6a18@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803221111n56e51f59w9a33e02e8a2379c2@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 05:27 PM 3/21/2008 -0400, Rafal wrote: > > >The primary meaning has to do with de[s]cent, and identifiable > >differences between groups of different descent within a potentially > >interbreeding population. These are strictly biological facts, in > >the sense that an automaton completely ignorant of culture would be > >able to analyze and properly segregate organisms strictly by > >investigating their inherited traits. > > By "properly" I assume you mean "reliably" or "replicably" rather > than "appropriately." The distinction is important. What canon of > criteria, independent-of-human-history, does the automaton use to > select the major traits it uses to characterize individuals into 3, > 30 or 300 "human races"? For example, to what extent are the tens of > thousands of traits of people called "Negroes" or "blacks" > cross-correlated, and would the automatons rediscover this "racial > group" as automatons have rediscovered certain theorems of set > theory? ### Yes. You can randomly select neutral polymorphisms (i.e. variations in coding regions of the genome which do not change protein sequence, and therefore can be assumed for the most part to be neutral with respect to phenotype and fitness), run a cluster analysis, and the common racial groups pop out without any additional input. See here: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1196372. Please note here: Self-reported race correlates with the clustering (which was done without any input about phenotype) in 99.85% of cases. So there is a genetic, heritable quality to all of us, almost all of us know it, and call it "race". Another study using the same methodology and looking not only at the US but at populations widely scattered across the world found clustering in five groups ( http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.0010070#journal-pgen-0010070-b001) corresponding to racial groups recognized previously, as well as some populations which form their own smaller clusters and could add to the count of races. Lumpers and splitters can have a field day here but one way or another, commonly recognized races can be re-discovered in complete ignorance of culture, phenotype and geography. ------------------------------------------------------------- > *We* know they nearly all have visibly darker skin that some > other humans of historically different geographical descent, of > course. Do they all have thick everted lips? No. Wide flattened > noses? No. Kinky hair? No. Specific blood types? MHC genes? Fast > twitch muscles? Weeeeellll--of course, those people traditionally > labelled "black" whose ancestors lived fairly segregated lives in > regions of Africa or Papua or Australia or India for many many > generations will tend to share some but not all of these traits. > Plenty of other people of different historical descent in widely > separated parts of the planet will share other traits. What's a poor > mindless automaton to do? Look at tooth size? Fingernail shape? Exact > hue of liver? Height? Girth? IQ? Ah, look, here's the "race of > Mensans" popping out! They all do great on tests, and you can tell > them by their distinctive skin color... well, no, wait, it's true > that many have ancestors from China and Japan, but that's also true > of a very large number of fairly ordinary or stupid people. > > ### Morphometric analysis can also be done, and will in general agree with random genotype testing.... but of course, why bother. IQ testing alone is insufficient to determine an individual's descent, although it does provide some clues, e.g. very high IQ makes it more slightly more likely that the individual is Ashkenazi, or Asian. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com Sat Mar 22 18:10:29 2008 From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <20080322172248.FQCM1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <660442.20688.qm@web56515.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Natasha Vita-More wrote: At 08:51 PM 3/21/2008, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >I think Anne is talking about society's attitude towards people with >autism. For example, see this article: > >http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism This a great article. Reactions to people with so-called disabilities have a stronghold on society. But we know that, for the most part, strong reactions stem from fear and one way to separate one seemingly healthy group from the seeming unhealthy group. A reaction to ostracize (however strongly or inadvertently) for being dissimilar, including mental, emotional, and physical abilities, may be an innate or a learned/acquired behavior. We may need to be understanding of this behavior as well because we experience even more of such reactions in the coming years as humans morph in a variety of ways. THANK you, Natasha...that is *exactly* the point I was trying to make (as opposed to any bizarre notion about "limiting myself"). A lot of people react negatively to autistics and others who are atypical in some way without ever examining the possible roots of their negative reaction. I remember when I was little, long before I knew anything about differing neurologies (much less my own), and being *attacked* seemingly at random by other kids, sometimes physically, simply for existing in the presence of others. I didn't know anything back then about body language and how it affects interactions, but kids just tended to respond instinctively to me as if there was something "wrong" with me and that I either needed to be assimilated (made more like them) or "driven out" so I wouldn't contaminate them or something. It was very strange. I suspect that perhaps I fell into "uncanny valley" territory for many when I was growing up, which made me fair game as something they could attack. Many others on the spectrum (as well as many people with various disabilities, or differences such as homosexuality) have described similar things happening to them, and I think this is not something humanity can afford to ignore, *especially* (as you say) that humans are certainly going to "morph" in a wider variety of ways in the coming years. I don't see how the world is going to handle cyborgs and people with four arms or whatever if they can't handle an autistic person who communicates primarily through the computer. Cultures HAVE to become more flexible and accommodating of different kinds of people and morphologies, or else they risk devolving into "Optimality Police" states. People really need to get it into their heads that yes, other people are inevitably going to choose (to maintain, or to acquire) configurations that they themselves would not personally enjoy. And in order to do this, I think that examining and possibly rooting out the deep biases inherent in their fear reactions and such is very necessary. (and that's all for now on this topic, folks -- I want to spend some time today working on a story about robots!) - Anne "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!" - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time" --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benboc at lineone.net Sat Mar 22 18:43:42 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:43:42 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47E5535E.7030406@lineone.net> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote: > Give me a god-damned break. > >... > > Person: "Oh, I've often thought about signing up for cryonics, but I > haven't gotten around to it yet." > > Me: "If you have an accident before you get around to it, it will be > death by stupidity." > > Person (pauses): "Good point." Thanks, Eleizer. You may have just saved a life. ben zaiboc From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 18:56:05 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:56:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <1206207075_11972@S1.cableone.net> References: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <104604.18383.qm@web56502.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <1206207075_11972@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <2d6187670803221156r55dd71d7rd93481f374b5e446@mail.gmail.com> Natasha, I sometimes notice in myself the strong desire to be separate from others who are "different in a possibly negative way" and I think it is in large part an innate/evolutionary behavior, which can be at least up to a point, overcome. I will see someone with a severe physical/mental deformity and at some level I will feel repelled by them. And yet I feel ashamed of myself at the same time. I try to fight this urge to escape them and where it seems appropriate I say hello to the person and make some smalltalk (and then the feeling of repulsion generally fades away almost immediately). The mentally retarded don't "bother" me (I generally find them sweet and charming and I grew up around a friend with a younger sibling who was seriously mentally retarded and who would hang out with us on occasion) but angry schizophrenics yelling to themselves at the top of their lungs as they walk the streets do cause me to stay out of their way. I just don't have the training to deal with them. In college I worked for a nonprofit organization that took mainstream and mentally handicapped teens into the wilderness for adventure and skill building. The experience gave me confidence that "mentally handicapped" and "non-handicapped" youth can learn to work together and even develop real friendships. It was one of the best experiences of my life. I really admire your work/volunteering for the disadvantaged (especially considering the depth of it). There is even more to you than I realized. When you hit your 1,000th birthday I will have totally lost track of your accomplishments! : ) John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 22 18:55:51 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:55:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com><26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080321003901.02488878@satx.rr.com><278101c88b4b$bae188d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321100332.023a7158@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <27c701c88c4e$f24adf70$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > At 05:00 AM 3/21/2008 -0700, Lee wrote, adding his own gloss in brackets: > >> > or [continuing the litany of Western thought-crime] despised Asians >> > as "lesser breeds without the law", >> >> and I suppose you never heard what the inhabitants of the Central >> Kingdom under Heaven thought of Westerners, and, in fact anyone >> not Chinese? Looking down your nose at other tribes or other >> peoples was hardly invented by just the detested Europeans. > > It is mischievous, Lee, to say this, *having just deleted the end of > my sentence* which made exactly that point: Sorry. It *was* an honest mistake. On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me if the entire bulk of your paragraphs might make one point, and then with a few words "and of course vice-versa" appended at the very end. But again, I think myself to be better than to delete any part of a sentence or a paragraph that would cause a reader to get the wrong impression, so sorry, again, and thanks for the correction. > > or were despised in their turn. Hmm. Yes, "were despised in their turn" hardly has a subject, and no object. I.e., *who* despised them? Some third party entirely? I believe I've see you do the same as me or worse. >> Do you have any examples of someone on this list claiming that? >> Or is that just a straw man? > > >> >>### Race is not in the least determined by culture. It is a property > >> >>related to common descent. Again, Rafal and Stuart were discussing the biological notion. What is ambiguous here is what Rafal meant in the above sentence by "Race". It's possible for me to see why we are at loggerheads. To you, *race* is *intrinsically* a social reality. Almost by definition. It's the way you find people using the words. Rafal and I, (I don't know about Stuart), on the other hand, are merely and always thinking of what the science is---at least when we *discuss* it openly somewhere, like on this list. We want to refer to the objectively true fact that these gene clusters are not a product of perception or faulty science. Now yes, it is entirely possible that when we go out in the world and mention to someone that "Barack Obama may be the first black president", we are unconsciously using your form---after all, we in the U.S. when talking to ourselves or to western Europeans are trying to communicate what everyone takes for granted in our societies. In our western societies, as you know, people who have any but vanishing traces of African "blood" in their veins are seen as black. Again, not from racism, but simply because of who is "pure" on the one hand, and who is "mixed" and "minority" on the other. Can you see from an objective viewpoint what is really going on here, and why we are having so much trouble agreeing? Rafal did not mean, and was not thinking of what you're thinking of, or what people in Brazil mean. He was thinking of the scientific reality. For example, if you asked Rafal in a careful discussion what race Jesse Jackson is, he would guess 40%/60%, or whatever. He would instantaneously---unlike the Brazilians or you, evidently---claim he is talking about the actual, extant, true, clustering that perhaps Stuart isn't so willing to acknowledge is 100% real. Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 19:18:24 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:18:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] news: "Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide" Message-ID: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide http://www.livescience.com/technology/080321-suicide-robot.html An 81-year-old Australian man used a do-it-yourself robotic "suicide booth" to kill himself yesterday. He investigated the requirements for the device online; he was apparently able to download the basic plans for a machine. After constructing a device that would fire a .22 semi-automatic pistol, he positioned himself in front of it and set it into motion. The man, whose name has not been released, despaired upon learning that he would no longer be able to live independently. He was found dead by neighbors. As grisly as it may sound, the idea is already part of science fiction. Fans may recall the Suicide Booths (see photo) from the 1990's *Futurama* series; for only 25 cents, people (or robots) could enter the booth and be killed by robotically operated knives, saws and other implements of destruction. General Motors aired an ad about a robot thinking about suicide. In the classic 1967 Star Trek episode *A Taste of Armageddon*, two warring planetary societies used what amounted to a computer game to wage war on each other without all that messy bombing and destruction of property. The "score" was settled by the end of every day, as people lined up dutifully at automated suicide booths. Kurt Vonnegut used a similar idea in his very early stories like *Welcome to the Monkey House*; the Ethical Suicide Parlorswere staffed by human beings. Perhaps the earliest reference to this idea is the government lethal chamberfrom the 1895 story *The Repairer of Reputations*. As I recall, John Varley used the idea of a computer-based interactive suicide note in his award-winning 1984 story *Press Enter*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Sat Mar 22 19:19:02 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:19:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? Message-ID: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> I wonder if any of you can identify this passage? I have changed "words" to "memes" since that's what would have been used if this had not been written in 1921. "Are memes, then, so important and enduring?" "Why, Manuel, I am surprised at you! In what else, pray does man differ from the other animals except in that he used by memes?" "Now I would have said that memes are used by men." "There is give and take, of course, but in the main man is more subservient to memes than they to him are. Why, do you but think of such terrible memes as religion and duty and love, and patriotism and art, and honour and common sense, and of what these tyrannizing memes do to and make of people!" "No, that is chop-logic: for memes are only transitory noises, whereas man is the child of God, and has an immortal spirit." "Yes, yes, my dearest, I know you believe that, and I think it is delightfully quaint and sweet of you. But, as I was saying, a man has only the body of an animal to get experiences in, and the brain of an animal to think them over with, so that the thoughts and opinions of the poor dear must remain always those of a more or less intelligent animal. . . ." Actually, it's not much of a challenge given the net. Keith From amara at amara.com Sat Mar 22 19:26:24 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:26:24 -0600 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? Message-ID: Anne Corwin: >Cultures HAVE to become more flexible and accommodating of different >kinds of people and morphologies, or else they risk devolving into >"Optimality Police" states. But many do. I'm guessing that you're located in the US, and that one 'feature' is in the top five that I can't stand (kept me away for 10 years, and will be a driver for me leaving again). In other words; the lack of respect for differences and the strong (American) cultural pressure for homogeneity. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 22 19:27:52 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:27:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology References: <199601c888d8$7b3b5aa0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><588154.27189.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><7641ddc60803191528r76eafa72p6376c2c947a738f3@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080319183234.02539550@satx.rr.com><26fa01c88b11$9c73f890$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><001e01c88b15$fe2e2430$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <277001c88b48$3a59f7e0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <00ef01c88bb4$efa9dcc0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <280901c88c53$27ef7d80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Olga writes >>> My stepdaughter (who sports white skin and wavy blonde hair - >>> as a baby she was absolutely tow-headed) is 3/4 white and >>> 1/4 black. Were you to meet her, there's no way you'd think >>> she was anything but "white." >> >> I'll bet that a *lot* of the reason is due to the color of her skin. > > So you would consider her "white?" And then you repeated the question three times, no matter what I said. From what you yourself wrote above, however, "Were you to meet her, then there's no way you'd think she was anything but white" then that already takes care of one of the meanings we associate with your question. Obviously I would think her white. Now then. Say you next reveal to me that she is "3/4 white and "1/4 black", where you have shifted---and I have no problem with that---to a scientific type analysis. Here, what you rightly assume (and what perhaps Damien still denies) is that there is a fact of the matter to being "3/4 white and 1/4 black". Here the best interpretation of that is that three-quarters of her genes that have to do with biological clustering (objective groupings) are of European origin, and one-quarter of them are of African origin. The answer is, of course, is that I would *not* simply say that she is black. I would not say that she is white. Now that you shifted the discussion to the clustering (more objective notion), I would say merely "she is 3/4 white and 1/4 black" as everyone else would do. Except: Yes, there are racists who'd maintain that the reality is that because she has "some black blood" that makes her black. They're using the words in the way that we describe clean water and contaminated water: if you mix three gallons of of clean water with one gallon of contaminated water, then you have four gallons of contaminated water. I hope that it is needless to say that there is not the slightest bit of evidence that anyone on this list speaks or thinks like that. Do you actually personally know anyone who does, or is that taken as a truth by most of the people in the town where you live? >> And just how do people on the street know her family >> history. As they say here, can't she easily "pass for white"? >> Unless you're not being entirely forthcoming about her >> appearance. > > Who said people on the street know her family history? I neither said it > nor implied anything of the kind. You said that neither I nor anyone else would notice her African ancestry. Therefore I assumed that in order for there even to be a question here, somebody had to find out. Either some bureau kept records, or people were gossiping, or you told them that she is, to use your words "3/4 white and 1/4 black". Only in this case does your question make sense. > I guess I don't understand what you're saying here. And she > doesn't just *easily* pass for "white" - she does it ALL the time. Clear now? >> But I'm eager to learn: is there some kind of official classification >> where she lives, like there used to be in South Africa (and, for all >> I know, still is)? > > I don't understand what you're saying here, either. She lives in America. I didn't know that. Perhaps she lives in the deep south? You did refer to this weird rule >>> The reason my stepdaughter is considered "black" is due to the racist >>> "one-drop" rule - it has nothing to do with her appearance (or coloration). Are there actual persons you or she know who use this "one-drop" rule? Or do you merely assume that such people exist? As for the latter, of course they do. Every belief seems to have some supporters. The question is, "how common is it?". The way you were going, I assumed that she was not living in America. > Disclaimer (of sorts): I have no idea why or how the world works. I'm just > trying to crawl my way through the chaos. I thought that I understood this whole thing until I learned more about the situation in Brazil, and found that the social concepts can be very weird (to us here) indeed. Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 19:33:39 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:33:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? In-Reply-To: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> References: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <2d6187670803221233x477aa7acyea98f55c41eed499@mail.gmail.com> "Figures of Earth, A Comedy of Appearances" by James Branch Cabell. Thanks Google! : ) I wish I could say I was so literate that I did not need to use a search engine to track down the name and author of the book. This writer reminds me somewhat of Lord Dunsany, one of my favorite fantasists. John taken from Google Book Search: Today, some recognize Cabell as one of the first contemporary writers from the South. He is also noted for his unique blending of classic myths and legends with his own imagination and is considered a pioneer of fantasy writing. Figures of Earth is one of the classic American fantasy novels. It is set in Cabell's universe, a pseudo-medieval world with a lot of fantastic props. This story describes the life of Manuel, a swineherd of divine birth who rises to become a legendary hero and ruler. See other titles by this author available from Kessinger Publishing. >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Mar 22 19:34:53 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:34:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? In-Reply-To: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> References: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:19 PM, hkhenson wrote: > I wonder if any of you can identify this passage? I have changed > "words" to "memes" since that's what would have been used if this had > not been written in 1921. FWIW, the entire book is freely available online. Too much of the magical and fantastical in it for my taste. - Jef From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 22 19:45:46 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:45:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? In-Reply-To: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> References: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322144532.023be340@satx.rr.com> Has to be James Branch Cabell. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 22 19:54:05 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:54:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Sorry, Artillo, for not responding to your message earlier. I got side-tracked. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:45 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? Artillo writes > [John Grigg wrote] > >> Will it take humanity meeting & socializing with an intelligent >> alien race for us to fully realize we ourselves are but one race? > > That's how I always look at the world, unfortunately most > people for some reason or other can't seem to get past cosmetic > differences. "We all bleed red" is what I often say. People will > always look for ways to differentiate themselves from others > that are not "like us". Yes, it's built in, unless some pretty powerful memes or self-interest override it. > I'm not from a Hispanic land, I'm not of Asian descent, I'm not > black (does anyone know ANYONE who is actually the color > "black" anyway?) I am, ethnically speaking, AMERICAN. > I mean it's just an exercise in futility and divisiveness that > doesn't need to be. Nothing---nothing in the world---would please me as much as if EVERY AMERICAN thought exactly the way you do. (For one thing, that would instantly end all this "diversity" crap.) About a century ago, half of what you and I want really was true! Everyone who'd emigrated there had the half that said "I am an American". Especially the Italians. When the statue of liberty came into view, they'd start cheering, and practically would not stop cheering until they got through Ellis Island, at which point they'd proudly proclaim, "Now *I* am an AMERICAN!" Sadly, many others did not view them as genuine Americans. Part of their "reasons" are ignoble, but part simply correspond to a reality. Even these particular new Americans found that they could sustain only half of their new identity. Because even if they were lucky enough not to find themselves in a neighborhood where there were some Irish, or some Jews, or some whatever who took *their* own ethnicity pretty seriously, or some of the long time European residents who just dismissed anybody else as "just off the boat"---that is, if they happened be incredibly lucky and found themselves in neighborhoods where they were regarded and treat with utter fairness, a problem still emerged: They spoke English only with difficulty, found many of the cultural practices they encountered to be very strange, and frankly, found that after a while they just liked being with people who were more like themselves. Soon most were living in some "little Italy" somewhere. Now they *should* have forced themselves somehow to move out into the middle of the huge United States and somehow overcome whatever obstacles there were, and raise their children by hell or high water as non-"Italians". But who can blame them? Would I have had the strength or the foresight either one to do that? I am afraid not, sad to say. Again, I sincerely wish that everyone living in the United States could have your attitude. What an even greater nation it would be! Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sat Mar 22 20:14:09 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:14:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] MC Frontalot - Secrets from the Future References: <29666bf30803211551u5f33423et71fe0a3ed9f05045@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <282201c88c59$79e99bb0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ writes > For those of you who disdain rap for being only about gangstas and > hoes, etc., check out nerdrapper MC Frontalot's song, "Secrets From > The Future", about encryption. Fun stuff. > > PJ > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=nuRbyQx_bOY > http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9YoQm1Iz54 > > http://www.frontalot.com/index.php/?page=lyrics&lyricid=41 > > Secrets From The Future > > Get your most closely kept personal thought: > put it in the Word .doc with a password lock. > Stock it deep in the .rar with extraction precluded > by the ludicrous length and the strength of a reputedly > dictionary-attack-proof string of characters > (this, imperative to thwart all the disparagers > of privacy: the NSA and Homeland S).... All I can say is, eminem, better watch out! This kinda of stuff you're gonna fine out 's gonna drive you from the top of the charts in no time flat, without any doubt. Lee > You better PGP the .rar because so far they ain't impressed. > You better take the .pgp and print the hex of it out, > scan that into a TIFF. Then, if you seek redoubt > for your data, scramble up the order of the pixels > with a one-time pad that describes the fun time had by the thick-soled- > boot-wearing stomper who danced to produce random > claptrap, all the intervals in between which, set in tandem > with the stomps themselves, begat a seed of math unguessable. > Ain't no complaint about this cipher that's redressable! > Best of all, your secret: nothing extant could extract it. > By 2025 a children's Speak & Spell could crack it. > > You can't hide secrets from the future with math. > You can try, but I bet that in the future they laugh > at the half-assed schemes and algorithms amassed > to enforce cryptographs in the past. > > And future people do not give a damn about your shopping, > your Visa number SSL'd to Cherry-Popping > Hot Grampa Action websites that you visit, > nor password-protected partitions, no matter how illicit. > And this, it would seem, is your saving grace: > the amazing haste of people to forget your name, your face, > your litanous* list of indefensible indiscretions. > In fact, the only way that you could pray to make impression > on the era ahead is if, instead of being notable, > you make the data describing you undecodable > for script kiddies sifting in that relic called the internet > (seeking latches on treasure chests that they could wreck in seconds > but didn't yet > get a chance to cue up for disassembly) > to discover and crack the cover like a cr?me br?l?e. > They'll glance you over, I guess, and then for a bare moment > you'll persist to exist; almost seems like you're there, don't it? > But you're not. You're here. Your name will fade as Front's will, > 'less in the future they don't know our cryptovariables still. > > Now it's an Enigma machine, a code yelled out at top volume > through a tin can with a thin string, and that ain't all you > do to broadcast cleartext of your intentions. > Send an email to the government pledging your abstention > from vote fraud this time (next time: can't promise). > See you don't get a visit from the department of piranhas. > Be honest; you ain't hacking those. It'd be too easy, > setting up the next president, pretending that you were through freezing > when you're nothing but warming up: 'to do' list in your diary > (better keep for a long time ? and the long time better be tiring > to the distribution of electrical brains > that are guessing every unsalted hash that ever came). > They got alien technology to make the rainbow tables with, > then in an afternoon of glancing at 'em, secrets don't resist > the loving coax of the mathematical calculation, > heart of your mystery sent free-fall into palpitations. > Computron will rise up in the dawn, a free agent. > Nobody knows the future now; gonna find out ? be patient. From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Mar 22 20:22:56 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:22:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] WANTED: designers and artists images for "Future Blogger" Message-ID: <20080322202056.XKLO6098.hrndva-omta01.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> If you are a designer, graphic artist, fine artist, media artist, bioartist, conceptual artist, illustrators, scientist-artist, artist-scientist, etc., et al., please let me know if you have images that you would like to submit for accompanying articles at "Future Blogger" website. http://www.memebox.com/futureblogger "Future Blogger is a thriving new portal where futurists, future fiction authors and artists alike can share their visions of tomorrow with a like-minded community. There's no better time than now to get in on the game and influence the collaborative simulation of the future being assembled piece-by-piece by journalists, best-selling authors and talented designers." Venessa Posavec, journalist Please either email me at natasha at natasha.cc or venessaposavec at gmail.com. Create! Natasha From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Mar 22 20:33:40 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:33:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] MC Frontalot - Secrets from the Future In-Reply-To: <282201c88c59$79e99bb0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <29666bf30803211551u5f33423et71fe0a3ed9f05045@mail.gmail.com> <282201c88c59$79e99bb0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > All I can say is, eminem, better watch out! > This kinda of stuff you're gonna fine out > 's gonna drive you from the top of the charts > in no time flat, without any doubt. Ice, ice, baby. "you're gonna"? "without any"? From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 20:53:58 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:53:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of John Grigg ... The damage to frozen human tissue is so severe at the temperatures involved in cryonics, that reversing them and restoring a person to life is *currently* totally beyond conventional science. It is the dream of cryonicists to be able to bring a frozen person back to full health and reap the social and financial rewards, but that time is still a long way off... John Grigg Johnny, here is your chance to introduce the more techno-savvy vision of modern cryonicists. The notion is not so much to figure out how to restore the damaged tissue, but rather to read the condition of the damaged tissue, then (by some currently mysterious means) calculate it's condition before it was frozen, then either duplicate that undamaged configuration in another lump of carbon or (more likely) simulate that brain configuration in software on a very capable computer. Then the individual lives again (in a sense) in a holodeck existence. This brand of cryonics has the same kinds of fundamental issue that Religion Incorporated faces, the identity question: is the resurrected you you? If not, then who? This being said, those of us who buy into these scenarios should be understanding of those who just say no. They don't want that. But we may be able to simulate them somehow, from collective memories and recordings of that person. spike From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 20:56:45 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:56:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Article: "Sexing Up UFO's" In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803220902jc43da0dq510065c5cb1b23b1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of John Grigg ... "If I buy that car, then..." Then what? You'll be a chick-magnet? Hey John, I am a chick magnet! Of course, it is the wrong pole, so the chicks are actually repelled. But hey, I'm a chick magnet just the same. spike From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 22 21:01:15 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:01:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Lee wrote: > > About a century ago, half of what you and I want really was > true! Everyone who'd emigrated there had the half that said > "I am an American". Especially the Italians. When the statue > of liberty came into view, they'd start cheering, and practically > would not stop cheering until they got through Ellis Island, at > which point they'd proudly proclaim, "Now *I* am an > AMERICAN!" Ah - I recall back in the 1950s coming in from Europe - by boat - and seeing The Lady standing in the harbor. It brought tears to my eyes, and to this day that memory will do so. I was young, and America was perfect. When we disembarked in Hoboken I was horrified. It was the dirtiest filthiest place I'd about ever seen and the people I saw were loud and rough and rude. ...my first intimation that America was perhaps a bit different than I'd thought! ;) Regards, MB From jrd1415 at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 21:34:28 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:34:28 -0600 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > I think the democratic party had better look closely at this or we're in for > another four years of war and the bankruptcy of our country if enough > democrats jump and vote for McCain.. And this would be bad because...? The sooner the failed experiment which is the US -- perpetual war and worship of militarism, faux democracy, pervasive disconnect from reality, narcissistic self-absorption and American "exeptionalism" -- is bankrupted and utterly discredited, the sooner the next batch of folks can start fresh. John McCain will get us there faster. He gets my vote. "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran." That's the ticket. Best, Jeff Davis "It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it." -Edmund Way Teale, From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 21:44:53 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:44:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <280901c88c53$27ef7d80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803222147.m2MLl0UP018147@andromeda.ziaspace.com> >..On Behalf Of Lee Corbin > Subject: Re: [ExI] Race Biology > > Olga writes > > >>> My stepdaughter (who sports white skin and wavy blonde > hair - as a > >>> baby she was absolutely tow-headed) is 3/4 white and... > > So you would consider her "white?" > > And then you repeated the question three times, no matter > what I said. From what you yourself wrote above, however... > Lee Lee, Olga, all my ExI-chat friends, I urge you on this topic do tread lightly, if at all. spike From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 22 22:00:59 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:00:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Article: "Sexing Up UFO's" In-Reply-To: <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803220902jc43da0dq510065c5cb1b23b1@mail.gmail.com> <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60803221500s4c39729u920cc881db1d547f@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 4:56 PM, spike wrote: > On Behalf Of John Grigg > > ... "If I buy that car, then..." Then what? You'll be a chick-magnet? > > > Hey John, I am a chick magnet! > > Of course, it is the wrong pole, so the chicks are actually repelled. But > hey, I'm a chick magnet just the same. ### You mean you are a negative chick monopole? I used to be a Pole, too. Rafa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sat Mar 22 22:33:17 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:33:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] E=mc2 Message-ID: <8CA5A83DB9CAB60-85C-605D@webmail-nf16.sim.aol.com> I wrote on 3-22-08: ">Hi, since energy cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed from >one form or another, why feel sad or think otherwise? > >That form of energy which you think can be depleted is a thought. I >don't see any depletion of thoughts in nanotech. > >Singularity in physics and mathematical language is a point which takes >an infinite value i.e. a black hole. > >A black hole swallows energy and where did that energy go? If we cannot >harness that energy swallowed by a black hole, then are we in trouble? __________ Terry, this shows such a level of physical level ignorance that I can't see where to start on it. It's clear you don't have a background in thermodynamics. How much science or engineering background do you have? I ask not to put you down, but so I can suggest what level to start repair education. Keith Henson ______________ Thanks for your kind suggestion. I have no engineering background but I'm eager to learn. My only background is on applied science, psychology. Sorry, the little I know about thermodynamics is the conservation of energy. I'm still trying to understand the second law of thermodynamics. There are so many technical terms to sort out in the 3rd, 4th and 5th law of thermodynamics that are too challenging to me. My son in college is taking courses on electrical engineering and can mentor me only when he is not busy. So I get the latest info about science, cosmology and other related subjects from the science website and documentaries on cable. In the past, I read books by Lee Smolin, Stephen Hawkings and Richard Dawkins as well as Marvin Minsky and Julian Barbour and many others whose name escapes me at the moment but I'd try to read more about thermodynamics when I get time to read. Why do I like to explore the fabric of reality? Just curious, I guess. Terry Terry From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Mar 22 23:09:51 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:09:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "MB" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 2:01 PM > Lee wrote: >> >> About a century ago, half of what you and I want really was >> true! Everyone who'd emigrated there had the half that said >> "I am an American". Especially the Italians. When the statue >> of liberty came into view, they'd start cheering, and practically >> would not stop cheering until they got through Ellis Island, at >> which point they'd proudly proclaim, "Now *I* am an >> AMERICAN!" A century ago when the experiences of newly arrived immigrants and the dangers posed to American consumers inspired Sinclair Lewis to write The Jungle? When lynchings were in flower? When we had segregated military forces? When we had "miscegenation" laws? Are you people daft ... or what? And (about 50 years later), when all was nice and perfect in the 1950s? (except for the fact that some American CITIZENS couldn't go to certain restaurants, use certain drinking fountains, swim in certain pools, go to certain schools, sit in certain places on busses ...) MB: > Ah - I recall back in the 1950s coming in from Europe - by boat - and seeing The > Lady standing in the harbor. It brought tears to my eyes, and to this day > that > memory will do so. I was young, and America was perfect. > > When we disembarked in Hoboken I was horrified. It was the dirtiest > filthiest place > I'd about ever seen and the people I saw were loud and rough and rude. However, even if Hoboken were the most beautiful and cleanest place you'd ever seen, and even if Hoboken were populated with the kindest and most courteous citizens known to humankind ... America in the 1950s had one cancerous eye (de jure segregation in the South), and one black one (de facto segregation just about everywhere else). All right, Spike :) ... I am done talking about this subject except to say that the white privilege viewpoint seems to be more recalcitrant that I thought. I give up. (But for those of you who may be interested in investigating - instead of writing off certain citizens in USAmerica, as if they and their experiences didn't exist - I would recommend the book "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?" And maybe also: "Afraid of the Dark," by Jim Myers.) Over and out, Olga From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 22 21:42:18 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:42:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? In-Reply-To: <1206213626_13220@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <200803222331.m2MNV5UO029723@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of hkhenson > Subject: [ExI] Can you place this? ... > "Yes, yes, my dearest, I know you believe that, and I think > ... remain always those of a more or less intelligent animal. . . ." > > Actually, it's not much of a challenge given the net. > > Keith Sure can, Keith: Figures of Earth, a Comedy. by James Branch Cabell, page 154. With the internet, I AM A GOD! Without it, I am nothing. No, that is a laughable understatement. Without the internet, I am nothing but a blob of slimy goo, an invected puss-filled blister, a writhing, revolting mass of protoplasm, a brain without a database, a slender tube filled with excrement, a sometimes oddly entertaining but otherwise wretched and useless collection of carbon and trace elements, a turd with a skin covering. But with the internet, I AM A GOD! spike From hkhenson at rogers.com Sun Mar 23 00:03:01 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:03:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] E=mc2 In-Reply-To: <8CA5A83DB9CAB60-85C-605D@webmail-nf16.sim.aol.com> References: <8CA5A83DB9CAB60-85C-605D@webmail-nf16.sim.aol.com> Message-ID: <1206230668_14402@S4.cableone.net> At 03:33 PM 3/22/2008, you wrote: >I wrote on 3-22-08: >">Hi, since energy cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed from > >one form or another, why feel sad or think otherwise? > > > >That form of energy which you think can be depleted is a thought. I > >don't see any depletion of thoughts in nanotech. > > > >Singularity in physics and mathematical language is a point which takes > >an infinite value i.e. a black hole. > > > >A black hole swallows energy and where did that energy go? If we cannot > >harness that energy swallowed by a black hole, then are we in trouble? >__________ > >Terry, this shows such a level of physical level ignorance that I >can't see where to start on it. > >It's clear you don't have a background in thermodynamics. > >How much science or engineering background do you have? > >I ask not to put you down, but so I can suggest what level to start >repair education. > >Keith Henson >______________ > >Thanks for your kind suggestion. I have no engineering background but >I'm eager to learn. My only background is on applied science, >psychology. I hate to tell you this, but psychology and sociology have been seriously shaken up while evolutionary biology is putting a floor under those studies. http://www.fathom.com/feature/35533/index.html >Sorry, the little I know about thermodynamics is the >conservation of energy. I'm still trying to understand the second law >of thermodynamics. There are so many technical terms to sort out in the >3rd, 4th and 5th law of thermodynamics that are too challenging to me. The second law is the only one of engineering importance. It's the reason your car does not go down the highway when you have run out of gasoline. The consequences of this law are staggering. They are almost certain to kill several billion people unless we put forth the effort to obtain vast amounts of energy in useable forms. "Useable" is different from conserved. You can extract mechanical or electrical energy from the temperature differences between buckets of hot and cold water. Mixed into one bucket, the water has the same energy but you can't get useful work out of it. On this mailing list "singularity" usually referrers to the technological singularity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity This is the level of technology where humans are no longer in charge of history and projection of the future becomes impossible. AI and nanotechnology are bound up together because either one leads to the other in a short time frame. Black holes are not a source of energy at our current technological level, even if we had one. Keith >My son in college is taking courses on electrical engineering and can >mentor me only when he is not busy. So I get the latest info about >science, cosmology and other related subjects from the science website >and documentaries on cable. > >In the past, I read books by Lee Smolin, Stephen Hawkings and Richard >Dawkins as well as Marvin Minsky and Julian Barbour and many others >whose name escapes me at the moment but I'd try to read more about >thermodynamics when I get time to read. > >Why do I like to explore the fabric of reality? Just curious, I guess. > >Terry > >Terry > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Mar 22 23:44:29 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:44:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <00e301c88c76$ac24c6a0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> From: "Olga Bourlin" To: "ExI chat list" > A century ago when the experiences of newly arrived immigrants and the > dangers posed to American consumers inspired Sinclair Lewis ... Doh! I meant Upton Sinclair .. O. From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 00:20:04 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 20:20:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Since America is such a terrible terrible place, it puzzles me why so many people, of so many colors and countries and backgrounds, have wanted to come here and were delighted when they were finally able to. Over many years, people have tried to come here, died to come here. My people had to come one at a time - there wasn't money or clout to bring everyone at once. But oh! The two who started the move were ***allowed to marry*** in the US, whereas they were not even permitted that in their original home country. And I'm done with this thread too. And if I'm banned, so be it. Regards, MB From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 00:28:47 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 11:28:47 +1100 Subject: [ExI] news: "Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide" In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 23/03/2008, John Grigg wrote: > Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide > > http://www.livescience.com/technology/080321-suicide-robot.html > > > An 81-year-old Australian man used a do-it-yourself robotic "suicide booth" > to kill himself yesterday. > > He investigated the requirements for the device online; he was apparently > able to download the basic plans for a machine. After constructing a device > that would fire a .22 semi-automatic pistol, he positioned himself in front > of it and set it into motion. The man, whose name has not been released, > despaired upon learning that he would no longer be able to live > independently. He was found dead by neighbors. I don't see the advantage over pulling the trigger himself. -- Stathis Papaioannou From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Mar 23 00:17:10 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:17:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com><000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Oh, Jeffie ... you're a scream (I mean that as a compliment)! Olga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Davis" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 2:34 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] safer now; > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Gary Miller wrote: > >> I think the democratic party had better look closely at this or we're in >> for >> another four years of war and the bankruptcy of our country if enough >> democrats jump and vote for McCain.. > > And this would be bad because...? > > The sooner the failed experiment which is the US -- perpetual war and > worship of militarism, faux democracy, pervasive disconnect from > reality, narcissistic self-absorption and American "exeptionalism" -- > is bankrupted and utterly discredited, the sooner the next batch of > folks can start fresh. John McCain will get us there faster. He gets > my vote. > > "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran." > > That's the ticket. > > Best, Jeff Davis > > "It is as morally bad not to care whether > a thing is true or not, so long as it > makes you feel good, as it is not to > care how you got your money as long > as you have got it." > -Edmund Way Teale, > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 23 01:08:39 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:08:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mb's story, was: RE: are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <200803230111.m2N1AkGS024692@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of MB > Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 5:20 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? > > Since America is such a terrible terrible place, it puzzles > me why so many people, of so many colors and countries and > backgrounds, have wanted to come here and were delighted when > they were finally able to. Over many years, people have tried > to come here, died to come here. > > My people had to come one at a time - there wasn't money or > clout to bring everyone at once. But oh! The two who started > the move were ***allowed to marry*** in the US, whereas they > were not even permitted that in their original home country. > > And I'm done with this thread too. And if I'm banned, so be it. > Regards, > MB Nooooo MB! You aren't banned for that, far from it. You never even hinted at this. This is really cool stuff, and honest pal, one need not be ashamed to be an America-phile. I'm one, and an out-of-the-closet heterosexual too. If you would be willing, please fill in the detail on this wonderful story. We don't know your name, but you are among friends here. We like your posts. Who in your family wasn't allowed to marry? Why? Where? When? spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 01:15:02 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 20:15:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] news: "Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide" In-Reply-To: References: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201244.024e9368@satx.rr.com> At 11:28 AM 3/23/2008 +1100, Stathis wrote: > > An 81-year-old Australian man used a do-it-yourself robotic "suicide booth" > > to kill himself yesterday. > >I don't see the advantage over pulling the trigger himself. Well, he gets to violate the first of Asimov's unbreakable Laws of Robotics, which must provide a degree of grim satisfaction as one departs... Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 23 01:01:10 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:01:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <00e301c88c76$ac24c6a0$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <200803230130.m2N1TuX4005502@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Olga Bourlin > Subject: Re: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? > > From: "Olga Bourlin" > To: "ExI chat list" > > > A century ago when the experiences of newly arrived > immigrants and the > > dangers posed to American consumers inspired Sinclair Lewis ... > > Doh! I meant Upton Sinclair .. > > O. Olga, you are too honest. You woulda gotten away with that one. {8^D spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 01:32:15 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 20:32:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201532.0245aac8@satx.rr.com> At 08:20 PM 3/22/2008 -0400, MB wrote: >Since America is such a terrible terrible place, M, it seems to me that it's partly a matter of unusually high expectations versus some of the grimier and more horrible aspects of human, all too human experience. If the USA weren't seen in many parts of the world as a beacon of hope and freedom and opportunity and prosperity, the dire parts of its history wouldn't be so bitterly disappointing. >it puzzles me why so many people, >of so many colors and countries and backgrounds, have wanted to come >here and were >delighted when they were finally able to. Over many years, people >have tried to come >here, died to come here. It depends when and whom you have in mind. The USA wasn't an imperial global power until after WWII, and the great "melting pot" immigrations were half a century before that, I think. It would interesting to learn how many black would-be immigrants there were from Africa prior to, say, 40 years ago. I'm not sure many would have been that eager in 1850 or 1950 to undertake the journey to the land of freedom and opportunity. (Although clearly there were plenty of Chinese and other Asians who made sacrifices to come here even when they must have known they'd face a degree of rejection and even persecution from those already arrived--but then look at what they were fleeing. And at least the US allowed them in, unlike Australia with its repulsive White Australia Policy--law until, incredibly, 1975). Damien Broderick [a non-USian in the USA] From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 02:18:54 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 22:18:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201532.0245aac8@satx.rr.com> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201532.0245aac8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <34855.12.77.169.61.1206238734.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Damien writes: > > It depends when and whom you have in mind. The USA wasn't an imperial > global power until after WWII, and the great "melting pot" > immigrations were half a century before that, I think. > > It would interesting to learn how many black would-be immigrants > there were from Africa prior to, say, 40 years ago. I'm not sure many > would have been that eager in 1850 or 1950 to undertake the journey > to the land of freedom and opportunity. (Although clearly there were > plenty of Chinese and other Asians who made sacrifices to come here > even when they must have known they'd face a degree of rejection and > even persecution from those already arrived--but then look at what > they were fleeing. And at least the US allowed them in, unlike > Australia with its repulsive White Australia Policy--law until, > incredibly, 1975). > The US developed rules and guidelines about who was permitted. IIUC they had quotas on how many of what kind: Irish, Italian, Eastern European, Roman Catholic, German, Jew... And health exams. These guidelines were not set in stone, either, they were subject to change. I can well imagine there were rules about Africans, considering the trouble the US already had in that regard. Wasn't there evem an effort to ship Africans *back*? Isn't that were Liberia came from? (I'm historically challenged, folks) Weren't many Chinese brought here and treated like slaves in the west - lured with false promises of great riches? If I were an African I'd not want to come to a place where Africans were *assumed* to be slaves from the get-to. That would be a very problematical situation indeed. The fact that there were free black Americans (some of whom who had slaves, IIUC) still would not ease my mind. Those folks were known in their communities, and could be spoken for and protected if need arise. A stranger would not have that security. Are our hispanic people now facing a similar situation - assumed to be illegal? I don't know, but I've heard whispers that many men who work on construction crews here are illegals. But they may all have Green Cards, which is more than my son-in-law can get. :( Regards, MB From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 02:19:31 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:19:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Crow and Kitten are Friends References: <29666bf30803211158x767391b5jaf1ec7e992e43b0f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <286801c88c8c$5a4aa2d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ writes > And I got this in the mail yesterday. A perfect example of animal empathy: > > http://puppyintraining.com/assistance-dogs-and-puppies/seeing-eye-cat-cashew-and-libby/ > > "An Eye On You > Cashew, the 14-year-old lab is blind and deaf. Her best friend is > 7-year-old Libby, her seeing-eye cat. Libby steers Cashew away from > obstacles and leads her to food. Every night she sleeps next to her. > The only time they are apart is when Cashew goes for a walk. Without > this cat, Cashew would be lost and very, very lonely. Amazing but > true: this is one animal that knows what needs to be done and does it > day in and day out for her friend. - - Terry Burns" That's great. It's nearly as moving as the story of Flo and Flame, the two chimps. http://www.janegoodall.org/chimp_central/chimpanzees/f_family/flo.asp Thanks, Lee From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 23 02:33:16 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 22:33:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] news: "Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide" In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201244.024e9368@satx.rr.com> References: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201244.024e9368@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <01af01c88c8e$4228e480$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Damien said: <> A single 22 slug doesn't always get the job done. Or if it does, it could take a while to work and be very painful. My guess is that the the apparatus used a 22 semi automatic to fire multiple shots into the brain either through the eye socket or up through the mouth to insure a relatively quick and painless demise. But then again maybe the robot just made it look like a suicide. I wonder why the apparatus did not call for a larger caliber such as a 45 where a single shot should be sufficient. Maybe thats to prevent having to have a closed casket though. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 05:35:00 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 22:35:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com><27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> MB wrote > Lee wrote: > >> But new technology and new drugs sneaked in anyway. With >> similar, but not so extreme results. (Probably because the American >> Indians were already at a rather higher level of technology and >> civilization than the Australian aborigines.) > > I kinda think there was more to it than that. In the USA, IIUC, missionaries were > often sent to start schools and remove the children from their native culture and > convert them. The children (from what I've read) were not permitted to speak their > native tongue, nor wear their native clothing, nor learn their native > history/arts/culture/religion. > > Did that work "better"? Just last night some friends mentioned that they'd heard that the results were mixed. In some cases becoming actually educated opened up a whole new world to the Indian children. Was all contact between the children and their families cut? If so, one wonders for how long. If it was long enough---say they were sent away for years and years, then they'd come back as "white men" in the Indians' eyes. > What is "better"? From what point of view? Perplexing. When I happened to bring up the case of Australia last night, my friends did not hesitate: "It is better to spare the people than spare the culture." What can the government do except forcibly integrate the families into separate cities as far as part as possible? It should have been done a long time ago. > Or perhaps all that is Political Correct Speak about the Evil White Men. ? Not that, for sure. But best let the Australians speak for themselves. Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 06:20:22 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 01:20:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> At 10:35 PM 3/22/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: >What can the government do except forcibly integrate the >families into separate cities as far as part [apart] as possible? >It should have been done a long time ago. Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 06:44:11 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 23:44:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Olga writes > Lee wrote: >> >> About a century ago, half of what you and I want really was >> true! Everyone who'd emigrated there had the half that said >> "I am an American". Especially the Italians. When the statue >> of liberty came into view, they'd start cheering, and practically >> would not stop cheering until they got through Ellis Island, at >> which point they'd proudly proclaim, "Now *I* am an >> AMERICAN!" > > A century ago when the experiences of newly arrived immigrants and the > dangers posed to American consumers inspired Sinclair Lewis to write The > Jungle? When lynchings were in flower? When we had segregated military > forces? When we had "miscegenation" laws? Are you people daft ... or what? Are *you* daft, or what? What I wrote above is just an actual description of what often happened! What evil are you reading into my having written this? I did not draw any particular conclusion quoted by you! I was responding to Artillo's post, and using his style in my HARMLESS description above. Something must really, really be eating you. > And (about 50 years later), when all was nice and perfect in the 1950s? > (except for the fact that some American CITIZENS couldn't go to certain > restaurants, use certain drinking fountains, swim in certain pools, go to > certain schools, sit in certain places on busses ...) Oh, the crimes, the horror! Of course, it was better than what was happening ANYWHERE ELSE, but that is totally immaterial for you, evidently. Typical idealist. Still complaining until the very moment which--- after the good-but-not-perfect system you've destroyed is no longer around to protect you---you're lined up against the wall and shot by the new Stalins, you'll apparently just never get it. Lee P.S. Oh---I forgot, the Australians were just as bad. Sorry. They too must be pilloried forever with nary a word of comparison muttered. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 06:55:15 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 23:55:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com><27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us><287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > Lee wrote: > >> What can the government do except forcibly integrate the >> families into separate cities as far as apart as possible? >> It should have been done a long time ago. > > Hey, I am *very* open to ideas! Please, please try to answer the question I posed there, if your natural outburst is suppressed. (You know vastly more about the problem than do I.) I did *not* say that the solution I suggest would be nice or good. In my earlier post where I mentioned the same thing, I thought I had made it clear that I didn't like this one bit, but that all the alternatives looked worse. After all, you're the one who posted what's below. (Or do some people just like to endlessly complain, without offering any ideas about what to do? That explains a post or two of someone else's here tonight.) Lee _______________________________________________________ Damien wrote ## > > No jail for rape of girl, 10 > > NINE males who pleaded guilty last month to gang-raping a 10-year-old > girl at the Aurukun Aboriginal community on Cape York have escaped a > prison term, with the sentencing judge saying the child victim > "probably agreed" to have sex with them. > > Cairns-based District Court judge Sarah Bradley ordered that the six > teenage juveniles not even have a conviction recorded for the 2005 > offence, and that they be placed on a 12-month probation order. > > Judge Bradley sentenced three men over the age of consent of 16 - > aged 17, 18 and 26 - to six months' imprisonment, with the sentence > suspended for 12 months. > > Because the 28-day appeal period has expired, the sentences cannot be altered. > > Judge Bradley said from her Cairns home yesterday that she considered > the sentences "appropriate" in the case because they were the > penalties asked for by the Crown prosecutor. > > ========================= > from an email exchange last year following the court case: > > ======== >>So ... they don't have any minimum age of consent? > > I'm sure they must have. But it's a hierarchical male-brutalized > sub-society at the end of its tether. > > The article depicts a terminal "behavioral sink" with the top rats > picking with impunity on the lower rats, but everyone seething with > barely controlled fury, ready to kill each other, so the judge tried > not to inflame the brain-damaged lunatics. Not good law, but maybe > workable politics. From dagonweb at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 11:13:18 2008 From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:13:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: So when murrca is magically reduced to a wasteland of fine ashy powder and all people, buildings, roads, everything in it is away to oblivion, suddenly the world will be overrun by dictators? Laughable, *delusional*. I am personally convinced of precisely the opposite. The institute of the US is an exploitative device that SPREADS dictatorship, economic slavery and war as a typhoid Mary spreads infection. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 12:19:27 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:19:27 +1100 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 23/03/2008, Dagon Gmail wrote: > So when murrca is magically reduced to a wasteland of fine ashy > powder and all people, buildings, roads, everything in it is away to > oblivion, suddenly the world will be overrun by dictators? > > Laughable, delusional. I am personally convinced of precisely the > opposite. The institute of the US is an exploitative device that SPREADS > dictatorship, economic slavery and war as a typhoid Mary spreads > infection. I wouldn't go that far, there have been worse imperial powers. But it's important to ask, why do so many people around the world feel this way, even those in wealthy countries not adversely affected by decisions in Washington? -- Stathis Papaioannou From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 12:26:43 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:26:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? Message-ID: <8CA5AF84974FB7A-13D8-1145@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> John wrote:" The damage to frozen human tissue is so severe at the temperatures involved in cryonics, that reversing them and restoring a person to life is *currently* totally beyond conventional science. It is the dream of cryonicists to be able to bring a frozen person back to full health and reap the social and financial rewards, but that time is still a long way off... John Grigg _____________ My reply: So it is still a dream/a belief not a theory or working hypothesis for cryonics does not work by scientific method of investigation. ____________ Johnny, here is your chance to introduce the more techno-savvy vision of modern cryonicists. The notion is not so much to figure out how to restore the damaged tissue, but rather to read the condition of the damaged tissue, then (by some currently mysterious means) calculate it's condition before it was frozen, then either duplicate that undamaged configuration in another lump of carbon or (more likely) simulate that brain configuration in software on a very capable computer. Then the individual lives again (in a sense) in a holodeck existence. This brand of cryonics has the same kinds of fundamental issue that Religion Incorporated faces, the identity question: is the resurrected you you? If not, then who? _______________ My reply: Its neither you nor not you for there's no permanent person to be identified as change occurs moment to moment in the death of cells from a biological process during the interchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide. The intercellular system is not a person but a biological process among a lot of complex organ system such as brain and its supporting structures. What is a person? Its a conventional way of identifying an individual by social standard/culture using ideas/thoughts/memes. ______________ Spike: This being said, those of us who buy into these scenarios should be understanding of those who just say no. They don't want that. But we may be able to simulate them somehow, from collective memories and recordings of that person. ___________ My conclusion: Therefore cryonics is a belief not unlike a religious belief for immortality. Simulation of collective memories are happening since the course of human history. Terry From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 12:36:25 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:36:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] news: "Australian Man Uses Robot to Commit Suicide" In-Reply-To: <01af01c88c8e$4228e480$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <2d6187670803221218m472214a1xa8899f85a9112cf4@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201244.024e9368@satx.rr.com> <01af01c88c8e$4228e480$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <34888.12.77.168.249.1206275785.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Gary writes: > > A single 22 slug doesn't always get the job done. Or if it does, it could > take a while to work and be very painful. > Exactly my thought. Had a friend's mother who tried, and she lingered, badly brain damaged, for *years*. :( Man, if you're gonna check out, at least make sure you know how! Geez. :( Regards, MB From benboc at lineone.net Sun Mar 23 13:15:45 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:15:45 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> "Lee Corbin" declared: >Yes, there are racists who'd maintain that the reality is that >because she has "some black blood" that makes her black. >They're using the words in the way that we describe clean >water and contaminated water: if you mix three gallons of >of clean water with one gallon of contaminated water, then >you have four gallons of contaminated water. This is hilarious. Or it would be if it wasn't so tragic. It also means that we are all black. Every one of us, without exception. (reminds me of Steve Martin in one of his earlier films, when he was still funny. The Screwup, or The Failure, something like that, where he's surprised to learn that he's not black. (See? Spike was right! I'm composing this offline, and i don't have any god-like powers of knowing what Steve Martin's films are called!)) ben zaiboc (The Klutz? The Lame-o? The Retard? The Upfuck? - ok, clutching at straws now) From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 14:03:31 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:03:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> References: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> Message-ID: <34915.12.77.168.174.1206281011.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> ben wrote: > It also means that we are all black. Every one of us, without exception. My mother would be spinning in her grave! Where/when she was brought up there was question whether black people were fully people, whether they had souls and so forth. Gah. Regards, MB From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 14:06:54 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:06:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <34918.12.77.168.174.1206281214.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> > So when murrca is magically reduced to a wasteland of fine ashy > powder and all people, buildings, roads, everything in it is away to > oblivion, suddenly the world will be overrun by dictators? > > Laughable, *delusional*. I am personally convinced of precisely the > opposite. The institute of the US is an exploitative device that SPREADS > dictatorship, economic slavery and war as a typhoid Mary spreads > infection. > Question: if murrca is so evil why do so many people want to move here and live here? I think murrca has fallen off badly in recent times, but that seems not to have really stopped the influx. Regards, MB From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 14:19:05 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 07:19:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Article: "Sexing Up UFO's" In-Reply-To: <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803220902jc43da0dq510065c5cb1b23b1@mail.gmail.com> <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230719l258500dbt3a4d00855447c36e@mail.gmail.com> Spike, Did you see the very sexy and exotic cyborg gal in the photo? She will be all over you when you buy that car..., and then so will your wife! Uhmm..., but with a baseball bat!! hee ; ) Okay, the cyborg gal in the pic is probably going to be your son's first really devoted girlfriend, post-Singularity. It will only be after getting married that she will start using the scary metal claw on him! hahaha And then she will nag him about how he just doesn't fully understand her so he should let her "assimilate" him... But seriously Spike, if you were a single guy you would have no problem with the ladies. I remember you being a rather charming fellow and you have an excellent job (that always does help). In my case I don't repel the ladies, I just have a rather weak gravitational pull that doesn't keep them in my orbit for as long as I would like... LOL John : ) On 3/22/08, spike wrote: > > On Behalf Of John Grigg > > ... "If I buy that car, then..." Then what? You'll be a chick-magnet? > > > Hey John, I am a chick magnet! > > Of course, it is the wrong pole, so the chicks are actually repelled. But > hey, I'm a chick magnet just the same. > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 14:24:40 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:24:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] mb's story In-Reply-To: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> References: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> Message-ID: <34929.12.77.168.174.1206282280.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> spike writes: > If you would be willing, please fill in the detail on this wonderful story. > We don't know your name, but you are among friends here. We like your > posts. Who in your family wasn't allowed to marry? Why? Where? When? > It's not nearly as exciting as you want it to be, but it was the final motivation for the move to the US. The others of course were the dream of success/freedom, and the desire not to be conscripted into some local warlord's army. They were of different faiths and thus could not marry where they lived. So he came and made a bit of money and a place for himself and sent for her and she came and they married. One by one his brothers came over, as money allowed. The happy couple settled their religion problem by not going to church again. I kinda like that. Makes me feel like I'm following a family tradition - the church part, that is. ;) Regards, MB From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 14:29:16 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:29:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Desires for Immortality {Terry} Message-ID: <8CA5B0968A3B5EB-10FC-1502@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com> "Desires are neither right nor wrong. They are products of genes and memes. How many times have we undergone changes during a course of a lifetime? So those who desire for the experience of the past or the future, psychologically speaking, are in illusion or delusion. Illusions of grandeur and delusions of persecutions are disconnected to reality, the reality of change/impermanence. The movements of the mind/brain can be seen in monitoring devices {MRI and PET scan}showing microscopic changes. Brains that have undergone irreversible damage due to injury manifest behavioral change which can be seen/diagnosed as abnormal, not the norm for health. Now what is health? Is the condition known as autism healthy? It depends on your desire or the society's desire to live in harmony with nature. Autism is a genetic variation but its still nature as genes mutate, undergoes change over time.Those with illusions of grandeur desire permanent separation from suffering but suffering is merely in the eye of the beholder,a value judgement. We value immortality because we see change only if it is to our benefit. We are blind to reality due to misperceptions/beliefs of duality. Are we thoughts without a thinker or a process without a permanent subject that is subject to desires of pleasurable sensations beyond reason and direct experience? Reality is a direct experience of singularity as in scientific method of investigation involving direct observation and continuous testing and refining of objective monitoring devices. Cryogenics claimed the possibility of reversing dead tissues to health is a possibility within reach if only we have the device/technology to do so. We already have the genes to work with so why don't we focus on genetic engineering which is already showing success in treating diseased states? Terry From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 23 14:32:52 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:32:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] Article: "Sexing Up UFO's" In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803230719l258500dbt3a4d00855447c36e@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670803220902jc43da0dq510065c5cb1b23b1@mail.gmail.com> <200803222059.m2MKwpWa007740@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230719l258500dbt3a4d00855447c36e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <34933.12.77.168.174.1206282772.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> John writes; > > But seriously Spike, if you were a single guy you would have no problem with > the ladies. I remember you being a rather charming fellow and you have an > excellent job (that always does help). > Charm and humor keep, good looks will (most probably) fade. Good cooking keeps. Being fun and interested and smart keeps. Honesty and integrity keeps. Kindness keeps. Just check out all your "handsome jocks" and "beauty queens" from school days. Most of mine have gone to seed badly. (um... at my age most *everyone* has gone to seed! ;))) Regards, MB (another geezer) From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 14:36:12 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 07:36:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <34855.12.77.169.61.1206238734.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <34556.12.77.169.61.1206231604.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <7.0.1.0.2.20080322201532.0245aac8@satx.rr.com> <34855.12.77.169.61.1206238734.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230736n40d226c9i7d5d503f89166157@mail.gmail.com> Damien Broderick wrote: M, it seems to me that it's partly a matter of unusually high expectations versus some of the grimier and more horrible aspects of human, all too human experience. If the USA weren't seen in many parts of the world as a beacon of hope and freedom and opportunity and prosperity, the dire parts of its history wouldn't be so bitterly disappointing. >>> I remember having a Fillipina co-worker who told me many Fillipino's have very very unrealistic notions about what the U.S. is like. She told me they practically think the streets will be "paved with gold." And when they get here cold reality sets in. Many of them work, save, and then go home to buy a nice home, have servants and live the relative good life. But others do stay and focus on raising well-educated and quality kids who will get their big slice of the American pie. A number of American citizen males at my workplace (including myself) were given the contact info and photos of cousins, nieces, etc. back home who were looking for U.S. husbands & citizenship! lol I didn't act on what I was given but each girl was "vouched for" by her relative who gave the female's profile and info. I've had a number of friends who had almost given up on the idea of marriage but in the end married Fillipina women and seemed to have found happiness (and the women seemed happy, too). The friends who married Russian women did not *usually* fare half as well. I've always wondered what the key factors were that caused such a difference between the two camps. John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 14:54:36 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 07:54:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> Spike wrote: Johnny, here is your chance to introduce the more techno-savvy vision of modern cryonicists. The notion is not so much to figure out how to restore the damaged tissue, but rather to read the condition of the damaged tissue, then (by some currently mysterious means) calculate it's condition before it was frozen, then either duplicate that undamaged configuration in another lump of carbon or (more likely) simulate that brain configuration in software on a very capable computer. Then the individual lives again (in a sense) in a holodeck existence. This brand of cryonics has the same kinds of fundamental issue that Religion Incorporated faces, the identity question: is the resurrected you you? If not, then who? >>> Spike, I have never liked the "scan the frozen & possibly unrepairable body and then build a copy of" cryonics scenario. I don't see that as *me,* but instead a perfect in every way twin. The space/time continuity of *me* has been broken. In my Alcor paperwork I don't allow for that. No way!! : ) I see your scenario as totally different from how the Christian religion views things. A Christian theologian believes we have an immortal soul that is simply sheathed in an outer form of corruptible and mortal flesh and blood. When you die the immortal spirit is released from that sheath and at the moment of resurrection a sheath/body of indestructible and perfected matter is placed on the immortal spirit. Spike wrote: This being said, those of us who buy into these scenarios should be understanding of those who just say no. They don't want that. But we may be able to simulate them somehow, from collective memories and recordings of that person. >>> Yes, we probably will be able to make simulations of frozen people long before the actual individuals can be properly reanimated. I just hope destructive scanning methods are not used to make this happen. I'm looking forward to having "simulated Spike" and "the real Spike" running around at future Transhumanist conferences! lol John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 14:58:50 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 07:58:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <34915.12.77.168.174.1206281011.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> <34915.12.77.168.174.1206281011.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230758sf2482e6re3b77729c1a7970e@mail.gmail.com> On 3/23/08, MB wrote: > > ben wrote: > > It also means that we are all black. Every one of us, without exception. > > My mother would be spinning in her grave! Where/when she was brought up > there was > question whether black people were fully people, whether they had souls > and so > forth. Gah. > > Regards, > MB > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 15:00:20 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:00:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803230758sf2482e6re3b77729c1a7970e@mail.gmail.com> References: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> <34915.12.77.168.174.1206281011.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <2d6187670803230758sf2482e6re3b77729c1a7970e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230800q482f3bb4k340a6f2b0f12ee9f@mail.gmail.com> Ben wrote: This is hilarious. Or it would be if it wasn't so tragic. It also means that we are all black. Every one of us, without exception. (reminds me of Steve Martin in one of his earlier films, when he was still funny. The Screwup, or The Failure, something like that, where he's surprised to learn that he's not black. (See? Spike was right! I'm composing this offline, and i don't have any god-like powers of knowing what Steve Martin's films are called!)) >>> "The Jerk" : ) And I remember this *without* using Google! hee John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 15:27:01 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 11:27:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death { feelling/thought} Terry Message-ID: <8CA5B1179A175D0-10FC-1668@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com> Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death arise from narcissistic desire for immortality that evolved in the genetic evolution of the human species. What makes us humans who fear death? Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates according to the recent study/findings of the scientific method of investigation. The other 2% {a well -developed cortex} makes all the difference between humans and the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the potentiality to reason, to use technological advancement and a language/scientific method to investigate beliefs of reality, thoughts and memes. Science is neither a belief nor unbelief. It is a practice of awareness/objectivity using reason/logic in combination of advancing technology to test theories about nature including us. Some humans fear death and some don't depending on how the brain processes behave in spacetime of micro and macro levels of interactions. Some believers continue to suffer due to fear of pain of aging and death. Terry From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 23 15:27:10 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:27:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mb's story In-Reply-To: <34929.12.77.168.174.1206282280.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <200803231529.m2NFTGjX010355@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of MB > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 7:25 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] mb's story > > > spike writes: > > ... Who in your family wasn't allowed to marry? Why? > Where? When? > > > > It's not nearly as exciting as you want it to be... MB, now you're teasing us. I am interested in these kinds of stories. They are your family! You only get one family in this life. > but it was > the final motivation for the move to the US. The others of > course were the dream of success/freedom... Who others? Did they reach their dream? How? > and the desire not > to be conscripted into some local warlord's army... What army? When? > They were of different faiths and thus could not marry where > they lived... What faiths? > So he came and made a bit of money... Who made money? How did he make money? > and a place > for himself and sent for her and she came and they married... Cool! Then they spawned you, and now we benefit. > One by one his brothers came over, as money allowed... Brothers and their families? Or just single men? > > The happy couple settled their religion problem by not going > to church again. I kinda like that. Makes me feel like I'm > following a family tradition - the church part, that is. ;) > > Regards, > MB MB, this is why I am being annoyingly nosey about this. I am writing up my family's history. I have discovered a distant cousin who is going overboard. I volunteered to compile his family history. Turned out to be a big job. I have over 200 pages so far (if I printed out the microsloth word file) and I am only a third of the way thru what he has already written. But they are some really good stories. He was born on a subsistence farm in Idaho in the depths of the great depression of the 1930s. Even if you choose not to share it here (and that's OK too) MB I urge you and everyone here to collect as much family info as you still can and get it recorded in a digital file, along with photos etc. Do it for your own offspring, even if you personally don't get along well with your ancestors or offspring. It might be your most important legacy. spike From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 15:42:09 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:42:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230842v41e9c2f7r3ff97a0576525d96@mail.gmail.com> Lee Corbin wrote: >What can the government do except forcibly integrate the >families into separate cities as far as part [apart] as possible? >It should have been done a long time ago. Damien replied: >>> I grew up in Alaska and saw firsthand how indigenous cultures can get slammed by Western colonization. What at least some Alaskan natives went through was "fairly mild" compared to most Indians of the continental United States. The harshness of much of the Alaskan climate and the distances involved helped to protect them (at least up to a point). And now some of the natives reap massive profits from oil that was found to be on their land (but this can lead sometimes to very undisciplined & destructive spending and living). But all Alaskan natives do get free medical and at least partially subsidized college educations. There was a tribe in southeastern Alaska who were very shrewd and tried to fight the U.S. government using its legal system in an attempt to hang on to their lands and rights. During this many decades long struggle they sent many of their brightest young men to attend college and law school. A coterie of tribal lawyers finally won a series of stunning legal victories and secured the rights of their people. A photograph captured the strange schism that had formed between the three piece suit native attorneys (dozens of them) and the common people who generally had very limited educations and now seemed worlds away. A common attitude in the tribe at the time was that the young men who had worked so hard to become lawyers and fight successfully for their people in the "white man's world" had in the end lost what it was to be an Alaskan native of that tribe. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 15:47:09 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:47:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mb's story In-Reply-To: <200803231529.m2NFTGjX010355@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <34929.12.77.168.174.1206282280.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <200803231529.m2NFTGjX010355@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803230847w70f64e4fob2cc76682e7dd124@mail.gmail.com> Spike wrote: Even if you choose not to share it here (and that's OK too) MB I urge you and everyone here to collect as much family info as you still can and get it recorded in a digital file, along with photos etc. Do it for your own offspring, even if you personally don't get along well with your ancestors or offspring. It might be your most important legacy. >>> The Mormons can help you do this... http://www.familysearch.org/ John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 23 16:15:48 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 09:15:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803231644.m2NGiY3q028859@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of John Grigg Subject: Re: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? Spike wrote: Johnny, here is your chance to introduce the more techno-savvy vision of modern cryonicists... >>> >Spike, I have never liked the "scan the frozen & possibly unrepairable body and then build a copy of" cryonics scenario. I don't see that as *me,* but instead a perfect in every way twin. The space/time continuity of *me* has been broken. In my Alcor paperwork I don't allow for that. No way!! : ) Interesting. I would allow Alcor *only* the read-and-sim scenario. I wouldn't let them risk my me by trying to repair the brain that once housed my me. >...I see your scenario as totally different from how the Christian religion views things. A Christian theologian believes we have an immortal soul that is simply sheathed in an outer form of corruptible and mortal flesh and blood... Yes. On the other hand, the quasi-Christian Seventh Day Adventist theology (the one I know well) does not have that concept. In the SDA view, humans are machines. No magic extra anything, strictly machines, granted very complex machines not currently understood. As such they can be copied. Exact copies can theoretically be made in arbitrary quantities, not even necessarily requiring a supernatural being, but rather by a sufficiently advanced group of humans. ... Spike wrote: This being said, those of us who buy into these scenarios should be understanding of those who just say no... >>> >...Yes, we probably will be able to make simulations of frozen people long before the actual individuals can be properly reanimated. I just hope destructive scanning methods are not used to make this happen... Ja of course it will be ideal if we had non-destructive read capability. What I am really getting at here is that I actually *prefer* a simulated Second-Life-ish existence scenario to being resurrected in the meat world. >...I'm looking forward to having "simulated Spike" and "the real Spike" running around at future Transhumanist conferences! lol John Grigg : ) Bad idea. They would fight each other. {8^D Johnny you are too kind, pal. May the distant future world, simulated or matter-based, be filled with people like you. spike (But not *exactly* like you John. What if the duplicating machine got stuck and kept rattling out copies? Or some joker intentionally created a billion of you? Would you hang out together? How would we feed you all? ...Oh no! Here comes the gigaGrigg! Hey Soos, please take these fish and this bread and feed them into the duplicator, set it to run continually...) From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 17:05:00 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 18:05:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Dave Pearce's talk in SL starts in a few minutes Message-ID: <470a3c520803231005p6085a7f2m7300d7e5cebb9c5@mail.gmail.com> Come join! See translook.com From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 17:18:32 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:18:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <2d6187670803231018v4c15daf2lc505a3a2bb0a9e71@mail.gmail.com> Jeff Davis wrote; The sooner the failed experiment which is the US -- perpetual war and worship of militarism, faux democracy, pervasive disconnect from reality, narcissistic self-absorption and American "exeptionalism" -- is bankrupted and utterly discredited, the sooner the next batch of folks can start fresh. John McCain will get us there faster. He gets my vote. "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran." >>> Jeff, you have a very unique and rather perceptive perspective on things. : ) As I read your description of present-day America I thought about the Warhammer 40k pulp science fiction novels (well-written, great action adventure fun, but does show war as very nightmarish) where the human Imperium has been in a constant state of war for millennia against various alien and human enemies. Propoganda spews forth to propel the common people to brace for more and more hardship as human society sinks into deep decline. Special forces troops known as Space Marines, products of extremely advanced genetic engineering and cybernetic enhancement, barely hold the line against wave after wave of invaders. *"In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war"* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSOJOiSWQWA&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UID6LEzvRRo&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPIdoRVGtKM&feature=related John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bret at bonfireproductions.com Sun Mar 23 17:03:57 2008 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:03:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <8CA59DC7642922A-DB4-2A74@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> References: <8CA59DC7642922A-DB4-2A74@WEBMAIL-DG09.sim.aol.com> Message-ID: <3F365D94-E057-4272-AD57-A0BA29B38DF0@bonfireproductions.com> Test - sorry to send a test, but I got a bounce last time. I think it is my host. ~]3 On Mar 21, 2008, at 10:35 PM, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Lee wrote: > "Absolutely. On the most charitable reading, Terry might be saying > that > cryonics is the only preservation of human beings considered one-by- > one > as they die, but like John, I doubt that this was all that Terry > meant." >> Also, I don't think cryonics should be compared to religion or seen >> as >> competing with it. > > Certainly not, I agree totally. In this wise, cryonics is best > described as > a scientific hypothesis. No one I've ever heard says that cryonics is > salvation > because some angel told them so, or that it's got the backing of a > deity. > On the contrary. You'll also never find a cryonicist---unlike the > religious > types---ever claiming to know that it will work with 100% > probability. > >> A handful of scientists with rather limited funds have worked very > hard >> to get cryonics where it is now (and it still has a long ways to go). > > ___________ > > Hi, I would not demean cryonics as a cult but since you described > cryonics as a scientific hypothesis/theory where are the supporting > evidence/facts that can be tested to work as proposed by your theory? > The proposition it would work five hundred years from now is a mere > guess. Why wait that long if you cannot test it now? > > Genetic engineering has been successful in many scientific experiments > why not cryonics? If you can show the success now, I imagine you would > get a lot of funding from all sources both private and public. > > Terry > > Terry > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From jonkc at att.net Sun Mar 23 17:32:32 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:32:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com><200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> John Grigg wrote: > I have never liked the "scan the frozen & possibly unrepairable body and > then build a copy of" cryonics scenario. And what is being copied? Atoms of course, it always comes back to atoms and the silly idea that atoms contain your soul. And not just any old atoms, very specific INDIVIDUAL atoms; atoms that somehow have your name scratched on them. I said it before I'll say it again, if you can't overcome that superstition it will kill you dead dead dead. The Singularity will simply not allow a conscious being with ideas like that to survive. > I don't see that as *me,* but instead a perfect in every way twin. So we have something identical in every way, perfectly identical in fact, nevertheless being profoundly different. I really mean it, your future health demands you get over that idea! > The space/time continuity of *me* has been broken. Bafflegab translation: I'm in a different time and place. And space/time continuity of what? Atoms of course, it always comes back to atoms. John K Clark From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 17:39:56 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:39:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Technological singularity/simulation of reality Message-ID: <8CA5B240B5E5F7B-598-DEC@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> "On this mailing list "singularity" usually referrers to the technological singularity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity This is the level of technology where humans are no longer in charge of history and projection of the future becomes impossible. AI and nanotechnology are bound up together because either one leads to the other in a short time frame. Black holes are not a source of energy at our current technological level, even if we had one. Keith ___________ Hi, where in my post did I say black holes are a source of energy? There are many technological singularities, the discovery of tools dates back with the invention of the wheel, telescopes, medical {drug} and surgical treatments using genetic modification processes as in cloning of some animals and plant modification/cross pollination to produce a different copy from the original structure. Cryogenics use what tool to reverse cell deaths? Our current technological level is adequate with some organ transplants but not yet successful in some level. We cannot transplant brains and consciousness at this point in time. So are you saying that in some remote time the merging of AI and nanotechnology would produce a singularity? In other words, simulation of reality is virtual reality, another robot like existence. Terry From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Mar 23 17:50:36 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:50:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803231018v4c15daf2lc505a3a2bb0a9e71@mail.gmail.com> References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com><000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <2d6187670803231018v4c15daf2lc505a3a2bb0a9e71@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <022c01c88d0e$674edfa0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Jeff Davis wrote; The sooner the failed experiment which is the US -- perpetual war and worship of militarism, faux democracy, pervasive disconnect from reality, narcissistic self-absorption and American "exeptionalism" -- is bankrupted and utterly discredited, the sooner the next batch of folks can start fresh. John McCain will get us there faster. He gets my vote. "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran." >>> Jeff you sound rather committed to the establishment of a new world order. With that level of commitment and many of the countries in the world teetering much closer to the brink than the the United States to revolution and overthrow I wonder why you are not taking advantage of the nearer opportunities and establishing your new world order there. Should you succeed in establishing a utopian society where many others have failed I am sure that as other countries become disillusioned with their current forms of government they will choose to model their new societies after yours. Just out of curiousity what country or countries in the world today are closest to your ideas of a utopian government and how do they still differ from your ideal? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 18:12:15 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:12:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> At 11:55 PM 3/22/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: > >> What can the government do except forcibly integrate the > >> families into separate cities as far as apart as possible? > >> It should have been done a long time ago. [Damien:] > > [Lee:] >[...] I did *not* say that the solution I suggest would be nice or good. >In my earlier post where I mentioned the same thing, I thought I >had made it clear that I didn't like this one bit, but that all the >alternatives looked worse. The point is that this is *exactly* the appalling "solution" that helped destroy Aboriginal Australia, already reeling from the theft of land and livelihood. Here is the recent important and moving speech on the topic by newly-elected Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd: "There comes a time in the history of nations when their peoples must become fully reconciled to their past if they are to go forward with confidence to embrace their future. Our nation, Australia, has reached such a time. That is why the parliament is today here assembled: to deal with this unfinished business of the nation, to remove a great stain from the nation?s soul and, in a true spirit of reconciliation, to open a new chapter in the history of this great land, Australia. Last year I made a commitment to the Australian people that if we formed the next government of the Commonwealth we would in parliament say sorry to the stolen generations. Today I honour that commitment. I said we would do so early in the life of the new parliament. Again, today I honour that commitment by doing so at the commencement of this the 42nd parliament of the Commonwealth. Because the time has come, well and truly come, for all peoples of our great country, for all citizens of our great Commonwealth, for all Australians--those who are Indigenous and those who are not--to come together to reconcile and together build a new future for our nation. Some have asked, ?Why apologise?? Let me begin to answer by telling the parliament just a little of one person?s story?an elegant, eloquent and wonderful woman in her 80s, full of life, full of funny stories, despite what has happened in her life?s journey, a woman who has travelled a long way to be with us today, a member of the stolen generation who shared some of her story with me when I called around to see her just a few days ago. Nanna Nungala Fejo, as she prefers to be called, was born in the late 1920s. She remembers her earliest childhood days living with her family and her community in a bush camp just outside Tennant Creek. She remembers the love and the warmth and the kinship of those days long ago, including traditional dancing around the camp fire at night. She loved the dancing. She remembers once getting into strife when, as a four-year-old girl, she insisted on dancing with the male tribal elders rather than just sitting and watching the men, as the girls were supposed to do. But then, sometime around 1932, when she was about four, she remembers the coming of the welfare men. Her family had feared that day and had dug holes in the creek bank where the children could run and hide. What they had not expected was that the white welfare men did not come alone. They brought a truck, two white men and an Aboriginal stockman on horseback cracking his stockwhip. The kids were found; they ran for their mothers, screaming, but they could not get away. They were herded and piled onto the back of the truck. Tears flowing, her mum tried clinging to the sides of the truck as her children were taken away to the Bungalow in Alice, all in the name of protection... A few years later, government policy changed. Now the children would be handed over to the missions to be cared for by the churches. But which church would care for them? The kids were simply told to line up in three lines. Nanna Fejo and her sister stood in the middle line, her older brother and cousin on her left. Those on the left were told that they had become Catholics, those in the middle Methodists and those on the right Church of England. That is how the complex questions of post-reformation theology were resolved in the Australian outback in the 1930s. It was as crude as that. She and her sister were sent to a Methodist mission on Goulburn Island and then Croker Island. Her Catholic brother was sent to work at a cattle station and her cousin to a Catholic mission. Nanna Fejo?s family had been broken up for a second time. She stayed at the mission until after the war, when she was allowed to leave for a prearranged job as a domestic in Darwin. She was 16. Nanna Fejo never saw her mum again. After she left the mission, her brother let her know that her mum had died years before, a broken woman fretting for the children that had literally been ripped away from her. I asked Nanna Fejo what she would have me say today about her story. She thought for a few moments. then said that what I should say today was that all mothers are important. And she added: ?Families--keeping them together is very important. It?s a good thing that you are surrounded by love and that love is passed down the generations. That?s what gives you happiness.? As I left, later on, Nanna Fejo took one of my staff aside, wanting to make sure that I was not too hard on the Aboriginal stockman who had hunted those kids down all those years ago. The stockman had found her again decades later, this time himself to say, ?Sorry.? And remarkably, extraordinarily, she had forgiven him. Nanna Fejo?s is just one story. There are thousands, tens of thousands of them: stories of forced separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their mums and dads over the better part of a century. Some of these stories are graphically told in Bringing them home, the report commissioned in 1995 by Prime Minister Keating and received in 1997 by Prime Minister Howard. There is something terribly primal about these firsthand accounts. The pain is searing; it screams from the pages. The hurt, the humiliation, the degradation and the sheer brutality of the act of physically separating a mother from her children is a deep assault on our senses and on our most elemental humanity. These stories cry out to be heard; they cry out for an apology. Instead, from the nation?s parliament there has been a stony, stubborn and deafening silence for more than a decade; a view that somehow we, the parliament, should suspend our most basic instincts of what is right and what is wrong; a view that, instead, we should look for any pretext to push this great wrong to one side, to leave it languishing with the historians, the academics and the cultural warriors, as if the stolen generations are little more than an interesting sociological phenomenon. But the stolen generations are not intellectual curiosities. They are human beings, human beings who have been damaged deeply by the decisions of parliaments and governments. But, as of today, the time for denial, the time for delay, has at last come to an end. The nation is demanding of its political leadership to take us forward. Decency, human decency, universal human decency, demands that the nation now step forward to right an historical wrong. That is what we are doing in this place today. But should there still be doubts as to why we must now act, let the parliament reflect for a moment on the following facts: that, between 1910 and 1970, between 10 and 30 per cent of Indigenous children were forcibly taken from their mothers and fathers; that, as a result, up to 50,000 children were forcibly taken from their families; that this was the product of the deliberate, calculated policies of the state as reflected in the explicit powers given to them under statute; that this policy was taken to such extremes by some in administrative authority that the forced extractions of children of so-called ?mixed lineage? were seen as part of a broader policy of dealing with ?the problem of the Aboriginal population?. One of the most notorious examples of this approach was from the Northern Territory Protector of Natives, who stated: Generally by the fifth and invariably by the sixth generation, all native characteristics of the Australian aborigine are eradicated. The problem of our half-castes, to quote the protector? will quickly be eliminated by the complete disappearance of the black race, and the swift submergence of their progeny in the white... The Western Australian Protector of Natives expressed not dissimilar views, expounding them at length in Canberra in 1937 at the first national conference on Indigenous affairs that brought together the Commonwealth and state protectors of natives. These are uncomfortable things to be brought out into the light. They are not pleasant. They are profoundly disturbing. But we must acknowledge these facts if we are to deal once and for all with the argument that the policy of generic forced separation was somehow well motivated, justified by its historical context and, as a result, unworthy of any apology today. Then we come to the argument of intergenerational responsibility, also used by some to argue against giving an apology today. But let us remember the fact that the forced removal of Aboriginal children was happening as late as the early 1970s. The 1970s is not exactly a point in remote antiquity. There are still serving members of this parliament who were first elected to this place in the early 1970s. It is well within the adult memory span of many of us. The uncomfortable truth for us all is that the parliaments of the nation, individually and collectively, enacted statutes and delegated authority under those statutes that made the forced removal of children on racial grounds fully lawful. There is a further reason for an apology as well: it is that reconciliation is in fact an expression of a core value of our nation--and that value is a fair go for all. There is a deep and abiding belief in the Australian community that, for the stolen generations, there was no fair go at all. There is a pretty basic Aussie belief that says that it is time to put right this most outrageous of wrongs. It is for these reasons, quite apart from concerns of fundamental human decency, that the governments and parliaments of this nation must make this apology--because, put simply, the laws that our parliaments enacted made the stolen generations possible. We, the parliaments of the nation, are ultimately responsible, not those who gave effect to our laws. And the problem lay with the laws themselves. As has been said of settler societies elsewhere, we are the bearers of many blessings from our ancestors; therefore we must also be the bearer of their burdens as well. Therefore, for our nation, the course of action is clear: that is, to deal now with what has become one of the darkest chapters in Australia?s history. In doing so, we are doing more than contending with the facts, the evidence and the often rancorous public debate. In doing so, we are also wrestling with our own soul. This is not, as some would argue, a black-armband view of history; it is just the truth: the cold, confronting, uncomfortable truth--facing it, dealing with it, moving on from it. Until we fully confront that truth, there will always be a shadow hanging over us and our future as a fully united and fully reconciled people. It is time to reconcile. It is time to recognise the injustices of the past. It is time to say sorry. It is time to move forward together. To the stolen generations, I say the following: as Prime Minister of Australia, I am sorry. On behalf of the government of Australia, I am sorry. On behalf of the parliament of Australia, I am sorry. I offer you this apology without qualification. We apologise for the hurt, the pain and suffering that we, the parliament, have caused you by the laws that previous parliaments have enacted. We apologise for the indignity, the degradation and the humiliation these laws embodied. We offer this apology to the mothers, the fathers, the brothers, the sisters, the families and the communities whose lives were ripped apart by the actions of successive governments under successive parliaments. In making this apology, I would also like to speak personally to the members of the stolen generations and their families: to those here today, so many of you; to those listening across the nation--from Yuendumu, in the central west of the Northern Territory, to Yabara, in North Queensland, and to Pitjantjatjara in South Australia. I know that, in offering this apology on behalf of the government and the parliament, there is nothing I can say today that can take away the pain you have suffered personally. Whatever words I speak today, I cannot undo that. Words alone are not that powerful; grief is a very personal thing. I ask those non-Indigenous Australians listening today who may not fully understand why what we are doing is so important to imagine for a moment that this had happened to you. I say to honourable members here present: imagine if this had happened to us. Imagine the crippling effect. Imagine how hard it would be to forgive. My proposal is this: if the apology we extend today is accepted in the spirit of reconciliation, in which it is offered, we can today resolve together that there be a new beginning for Australia. And it is to such a new beginning that I believe the nation is now calling us. Australians are a passionate lot. We are also a very practical lot. For us, symbolism is important but, unless the great symbolism of reconciliation is accompanied by an even greater substance, it is little more than a clanging gong. It is not sentiment that makes history; it is our actions that make history. Today?s apology, however inadequate, is aimed at righting past wrongs. It is also aimed at building a bridge between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians--a bridge based on a real respect rather than a thinly veiled contempt. Our challenge for the future is to cross that bridge and, in so doing, to embrace a new partnership between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians--to embrace, as part of that partnership, expanded Link-up and other critical services to help the stolen generations to trace their families if at all possible and to provide dignity to their lives. But the core of this partnership for the future is to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians on life expectancy, educational achievement and employment opportunities. This new partnership on closing the gap will set concrete targets for the future: within a decade to halve the widening gap in literacy, numeracy and employment outcomes and opportunities for Indigenous Australians, within a decade to halve the appalling gap in infant mortality rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children and, within a generation, to close the equally appalling 17-year life gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous in overall life expectancy. The truth is: a business as usual approach towards Indigenous Australians is not working. Most old approaches are not working. We need a new beginning--a new beginning which contains real measures of policy success or policy failure; a new beginning, a new partnership, on closing the gap with sufficient flexibility not to insist on a one-size-fits-all approach for each of the hundreds of remote and regional Indigenous communities across the country but instead allowing flexible, tailored, local approaches to achieve commonly-agreed national objectives that lie at the core of our proposed new partnership; a new beginning that draws intelligently on the experiences of new policy settings across the nation. However, unless we as a parliament set a destination for the nation, we have no clear point to guide our policy, our programs or our purpose; we have no centralised organising principle. Let us resolve today to begin with the little children--a fitting place to start on this day of apology for the stolen generations. Let us resolve over the next five years to have every Indigenous four-year-old in a remote Aboriginal community enrolled in and attending a proper early childhood education centre or opportunity and engaged in proper preliteracy and prenumeracy programs. Let us resolve to build new educational opportunities for these little ones, year by year, step by step, following the completion of their crucial preschool year. Let us resolve to use this systematic approach to build future educational opportunities for Indigenous children to provide proper primary and preventive health care for the same children, to begin the task of rolling back the obscenity that we find today in infant mortality rates in remote Indigenous communities--up to four times higher than in other communities. None of this will be easy. Most of it will be hard--very hard. But none of it is impossible, and all of it is achievable with clear goals, clear thinking, and by placing an absolute premium on respect, cooperation and mutual responsibility as the guiding principles of this new partnership on closing the gap. The mood of the nation is for reconciliation now, between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. The mood of the nation on Indigenous policy and politics is now very simple. The nation is calling on us, the politicians, to move beyond our infantile bickering, our point-scoring and our mindlessly partisan politics and to elevate this one core area of national responsibility to a rare position beyond the partisan divide. Surely this is the unfulfilled spirit of the 1967 referendum. Surely, at least from this day forward, we should give it a go. Let me take this one step further and take what some may see as a piece of political posturing and make a practical proposal to the opposition on this day, the first full sitting day of the new parliament. I said before the election that the nation needed a kind of war cabinet on parts of Indigenous policy, because the challenges are too great and the consequences are too great to allow it all to become a political football, as it has been so often in the past. I therefore propose a joint policy commission, to be led by the Leader of the Opposition and me, with a mandate to develop and implement--to begin with--an effective housing strategy for remote communities over the next five years. It will be consistent with the government?s policy framework, a new partnership for closing the gap. If this commission operates well, I then propose that it work on the further task of constitutional recognition of the first Australians, consistent with the longstanding platform commitments of my party and the pre-election position of the opposition. This would probably be desirable in any event because, unless such a proposition were absolutely bipartisan, it would fail at a referendum. As I have said before, the time has come for new approaches to enduring problems. Working constructively together on such defined projects would, I believe, meet with the support of the nation. It is time for fresh ideas to fashion the nation?s future. Mr Speaker, today the parliament has come together to right a great wrong. We have come together to deal with the past so that we might fully embrace the future. We have had sufficient audacity of faith to advance a pathway to that future, with arms extended rather than with fists still clenched. So let us seize the day. Let it not become a moment of mere sentimental reflection. Let us take it with both hands and allow this day, this day of national reconciliation, to become one of those rare moments in which we might just be able to transform the way in which the nation thinks about itself, whereby the injustice administered to the stolen generations in the name of these, our parliaments, causes all of us to reappraise, at the deepest level of our beliefs, the real possibility of reconciliation writ large: reconciliation across all Indigenous Australia; reconciliation across the entire history of the often bloody encounter between those who emerged from the Dreamtime a thousand generations ago and those who, like me, came across the seas only yesterday; reconciliation which opens up whole new possibilities for the future. It is for the nation to bring the first two centuries of our settled history to a close, as we begin a new chapter. We embrace with pride, admiration and awe these great and ancient cultures we are truly blessed to have among us--cultures that provide a unique, uninterrupted human thread linking our Australian continent to the most ancient prehistory of our planet. Growing from this new respect, we see our Indigenous brothers and sisters with fresh eyes, with new eyes, and we have our minds wide open as to how we might tackle, together, the great practical challenges that Indigenous Australia faces in the future. Let us turn this page together: Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, government and opposition, Commonwealth and state, and write this new chapter in our nation?s story together. First Australians, First Fleeters, and those who first took the oath of allegiance just a few weeks ago. Let?s grasp this opportunity to craft a new future for this great land: Australia. From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 18:40:19 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:40:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323132936.02378ec0@satx.rr.com> At 01:12 PM 3/23/2008 -0500, I wrote: >Here is the recent important and moving speech on >the topic by newly-elected Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd: For the other side of the argument here's: The string of comments is especially interesting. E.g.: "What people on the other side of you rile about is that it seems that people are claiming some sort of injustice, when really the government, in all cases I've seen so far, did the right thing by them. Saying sorry for saving someone from situations where they have syphyllis at 5 and are packed raped at 7 is, in itself, an injustice to those who saved such people." Perhaps this would also be Lee's response to the speech. My impression (I'm not a historian) is that the current behavioral sink, especially in some remote areas, is in significant part the *result* of smashing the traditional [far from perfect] social order, and abducting and dispersing many thousands of small children away from their parents. Damien Broderick From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 18:40:34 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 14:40:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Sexing up UFOs Message-ID: <8CA5B2C837DFE40-598-FED@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> MB wrote: "Charm and humor keep, good looks will (most probably) fade. Good cooking keeps. Being fun and interested and smart keeps. Honesty and integrity keeps. Kindness keeps." ___________ In an ideal world, where there is no poverty, crime and diseases or random events like accidents of birth occur, those above traits can possibly exist. We don't need to eat healthy foods and to exercise in the world of cryonics/simulated reality where everything you wished is already accomplished by a touch of a button, no sweat. In the real world, we sweat, practice and practice some more to be honest and kind. On another note, the news about that blind dog being helped by a seeing cat took practice in the part of the feline taught by a cat trainer to lead the blind dog. The blind dog would not see the cat but the need to find food urge the dog to follow the cat. It takes training and practice to change behavior. Terry From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 18:44:44 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 11:44:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803231144r51e06de9rd7f954a5c77538bd@mail.gmail.com> Damien, your prime minister's words were very powerful and deeply touching. I just hope he can make good on such sentiment. I recommend Lee Corbin watch the superbly disturbing film, "Rabbit-Proof Fence." Are there any movies/documentaries you would recommend to those of us trying to understand this problem? John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 19:00:23 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:00:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. In-Reply-To: <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> John Grigg wrote: > I have never liked the "scan the frozen & possibly unrepairable body and > then build a copy of" cryonics scenario. John K. Clark wrote: And what is being copied? Atoms of course, it always comes back to atoms and the silly idea that atoms contain your soul. And not just any old atoms, very specific INDIVIDUAL atoms; atoms that somehow have your name scratched on them. I said it before I'll say it again, if you can't overcome that superstition it will kill you dead dead dead. The Singularity will simply not allow a conscious being with ideas like that to survive. >>> John, I happen to have my initials engraved on each of the atoms of my body (it was a gift from my mom, last Christmas I think). ; ) Recently, I have been thinking about how in a Singularity/uploading situation my belief on this might affect me. I just ordered through Amazon.comthe SF anthology, "Beyond Flesh," edited by Jack Dann. I realize it is only a work of various fictional stories but it will help me to explore the scenario you bring up. I do recognize your true concern for me and I wholeheartedly thank you. But please remember that I am hardly alone in my view on this. Keep in mind the story of the scientist with the newly created perfect duplicate, who is totally convinced they are one and the same, and the rival researcher who makes his point by taking out of a desk drawer a .44 magnum... > I don't see that as *me,* but instead a perfect in every way twin. you continue; So we have something identical in every way, perfectly identical in fact, nevertheless being profoundly different. I really mean it, your future health demands you get over that idea! >>> Perhaps it does (even if I don't like it, lol). I see your scenario as having grimly accepted an unpleasant but unavoidable situation and simply trying to make the best of it. Your new uploaded (or biologically xox'd) "self" will be a perfect twin/mind child who will carry on your personal legacy. Hey, that is a whole lot better than nothing! It's a high-tech alternative to the very old option of having a child as one's personal immortality vehicle. > The space/time continuity of *me* has been broken. you continue: Bafflegab translation: I'm in a different time and place. >>> Numberless email list threads have explored/debated the concept of the "self" and the "self-circuit." you continue: And space/time continuity of what? Atoms of course, it always comes back to atoms. >>> As the years go by I might change my mind on this matter. But I doubt it! John Grigg : ) P.S. Once again, thank you for caring. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 23 19:34:35 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:34:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bees again In-Reply-To: <8CA5B2C837DFE40-598-FED@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803231937.m2NJafpX024602@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > On another note, the news about that blind dog being helped > by a seeing cat took practice in the part of the feline > taught by a cat trainer to lead the blind dog... Terry Sure but see this from the point of view of the cat. Wouldn't it be wicked cool? The other cats would watch their step around you, ja? None of them would give you any feline lip, so long as you had that big canine henchdog. New subject please: unibee Forgive me for being such a repetive bugwatcher. Lat spring I went on and on about seeing so many dying bees. To the observant bee watcher, this year is startling indeed. Usually by the ides of March, my back yard is an obscenely extravagant display of colorful blossoms. When at their peak (usually about now) I can sit next to my house and easily hear the collective buzz of hundreds of bees from the flowering vines on my back fence, eagerly devouring that abundant pollen like a bunch of wild...um, bees. Today is a perfect bee day, clear skies, no wind, 25C. There is exactly one bee. A busy, happy one for sure, all those blossoms and no competition, but still: one single lonely bee. Damn. {8-[ spike From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 20:02:05 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:02:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death { feelling/thought} Terry References: <8CA5B1179A175D0-10FC-1668@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <293a01c88d20$f2165980$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes (BTW, Terry, why do you put your name in the subject line? I don't have a problem with it---it's just unusual, that's all.) > Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death arise from narcissistic > desire for immortality that evolved in the genetic evolution of the > human species. I don't know how old you are, but let X = Terry's age. Then would you call your desire to continue to live well past the age X *narcissistic*? Because I want to keep on living---forget immortality (let's say that all matter is due to disintegrate in a few trillion years) ---why does that make me narcissistic? Or does it? > What makes us humans who fear death? Those in the EEA who didn't fear death often did not leave behind as many viable offspring. That's why. Clear enough? Speaking very precisely, and not in the usual manner, it's not death at all that I'm afraid of. I merely regret not getting to go on living. Do you have a problem with that? > Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates according to the recent > study/findings of the scientific method of investigation. The other 2% > {a well -developed cortex} makes all the difference between humans and > the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the potentiality to > reason, to use technological advancement and a language/scientific > method to investigate beliefs of reality, thoughts and memes. Yes. And reason tells me that if my life is worth living for a certain (future) interval Y - X, then I would rather be alive than dead during that interval. Is there a particular reason that you don't want to be alive during the interval 2350 A.D. - 2650 A.D.? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Sun Mar 23 20:17:03 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:17:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com><470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com><27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us><287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com><28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien still dodges my question. I had written >> What can the government do except forcibly integrate the >> families into separate cities as far as apart as possible? Instead there is perhaps (or perhaps not) an answer embedded somewhere in the PM Rudd's speech, an answer that Damien perhaps endorses. Starting with the paragraph (I've only skimmed a bit the whole whining thing) > This new partnership on > closing the gap will set concrete targets for the > future: within a decade to halve the widening gap > in literacy, numeracy and employment outcomes and > opportunities for Indigenous Australians, within > a decade to halve the appalling gap in infant > mortality rates between Indigenous and > non-Indigenous children and, within a generation, > to close the equally appalling 17-year life gap > between Indigenous and non-Indigenous in overall > life expectancy. and a some more a little bit further down > Let us resolve today to begin with the little > children--a fitting place to start on this day of > apology for the stolen generations. Let us > resolve over the next five years to have every > Indigenous four-year-old in a remote Aboriginal > community enrolled in and attending a proper > early childhood education centre or opportunity > and engaged in proper preliteracy and prenumeracy > programs. Let us resolve to build new educational > opportunities for these little ones, year by > year, step by step, following the completion of > their crucial preschool year. Let us resolve to > use this systematic approach In other words, the government is going to go in there and start adapting the children to "white men's culture", sure to be resisted by some of the aboringines as yet more of the same interference in their affairs that caused all the trouble in the first place. MB is perfectly correct in discussing the way that the American Indians resented very much some similar approach that was used on their children. And what are we to make of John Grigg's story that ended A common attitude in the tribe at the time was that the young men who had worked so hard to become lawyers and fight successfully for their people in the "white man's world" had in the end lost what it was to be an Alaskan native of that tribe. But, Damien, could you please---I promise not to demand yet again if you just ignore this--- *your* suggestions? And can you, unlike the PM, do it in less than 25KB? A brief outline or summary? Thanks, Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 20:50:12 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:50:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bees again In-Reply-To: <200803231937.m2NJafpX024602@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <8CA5B2C837DFE40-598-FED@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> <200803231937.m2NJafpX024602@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803231350s4507cccbh115ca9b8e97c613d@mail.gmail.com> Spike wrote: Today is a perfect bee day, clear skies, no wind, 25C. There is exactly one bee. A busy, happy one for sure, all those blossoms and no competition, but still: one single lonely bee. >>> Did you get a close look at him? Did the face remind you of Jerry Seinfeld? : ) http://www.beemovie.com/ Seriously, I hope we get a handle on the disturbing problem of massive bee die-off: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1087 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Collapse_Disorder John Grigg : ( -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 21:17:37 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:17:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Spacetime/thoughts exist in almost computerized simulation Message-ID: <8CA5B4274023303-598-1493@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> John Grigg wrote: "I have never liked the "scan the frozen & possibly unrepairable body and then build a copy of" cryonics scenario. I don't see that as *me,* but instead a perfect in every way twin. The space/time continuity of *me* has been broken. In my Alcor paperwork I don't allow for that. No way!! : ____________ Whether we like it or not we are thoughts occupying spacetime {brain/mind} in a four dimentional universe of almost computerized simulation. Genes and memes are equivalent to a computer programmer that directs how we behave. Religious believers who adhere to thoughts/desires of immortality are also slaves to genes and memes. Cryogenics are driven likewise by genetic force, an aversion to suffering. The goal for happiness and avoid suffering is a constant struggle for those whose emotional and mental development gets blocked by traumatic experiences. Advancing technology with successful therapeutic methods treat specific types of physical/mental states without waiting for the advent of cryonics to simulate reality. Terry From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 23 21:42:12 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:42:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> At 01:17 PM 3/23/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: >But, Damien, could you please---I promise not to demand >yet again if you just ignore this--- *your* suggestions? I don't have any. But the starting point is to find out how this horror came about and make sure not to do the same thing again. Damien Broderick From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 23 21:51:09 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 14:51:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <200803231644.m2NGiY3q028859@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <200803231644.m2NGiY3q028859@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803231451w46d8d013s656b6bcaba889ea9@mail.gmail.com> I wrote: >...I'm looking forward to having "simulated Spike" and "the real Spike" running around at future Transhumanist conferences! lol John Grigg : ) >>> Spike replied: Bad idea. They would fight each other. {8^D Johnny you are too kind, pal. May the distant future world, simulated or matter-based, be filled with people like you. >>> I now think *you* are being too kind. : ) I want the people of the distant future to be like (at least some of them) the genetically upgraded "goodnatured" young people of Anders imagination. Does anyone remember that post? He wrote so many great ones. you continue: (But not *exactly* like you John. What if the duplicating machine got stuck and kept rattling out copies? Or some joker intentionally created a billion of you? Would you hang out together? How would we feed you all? ...Oh no! Here comes the gigaGrigg! Hey Soos, please take these fish and this bread and feed them into the duplicator, set it to run continually...) >>> What would be scary is a "GigaGrigg" mass mind! LOL It brings to mind a Simpsons episode where Homer comes across a magic hammock that makes copies of people. You can imagine the rest. lol I'm looong out of my teen years and yet I still have a pretty dang fast metabolism and so I continue to surprise my much stockier friends by all the food I can put away at buffet-style restaurants. lol If a duplicating machine created a billion copies of me then the only option would be to create the galaxy's largest sushi restaurant (the size of Australia) where you would have to host all of us (since you did at Extro 5)! hee It would be all part of the upcoming "Far Edge Party/Galactic Conference." : ) I am not sure how well I would get along with perfect copies of myself. This is one of those "what if" questions that sort of nag at me. I tend to get along with most agreeable people but would copies of me intentionally/unintentionally hit my buttons and really tick me off? lol And it would be so hard for them because they would have all these memories that they did not actually live as I did. They would have to create their own lives/legacies and they might resent me (even if without my permission someone created many copies of me) for it. I would do my best to be a friend/big brother to them and try to get my perfect copies to be better/wiser/more ambitious people than I ever managed to be in my own life. I would tell them about my "roads not taken" and encourage them to consider exploring them. But then they would have all of my memories, though I could probably still give them extra insight. Over time I could see a number of them making personal decisions to go down unique paths I sure never did. War hero John, KIA in the first five minutes of his first battle John (much more likely), Social worker John, In prison for decking someone real hard John, Married with 9 kids and living in an asteroid belt commune John, Lunar hydroponics farmer John, Bus spaceship driver John, Intergalactic delivery driver John, Third grade teacher of little bioroids John, Divorce lawyer John, Ferret cloner John, AI civil rights activist John, and Action vid star John (cross Chuck Norris with Woody Allen...)! I once read a SF novel about humanity at war with alien powers who were slowly but steadily defeating us and pushing our boundaries closer and closer to Earth. In a desperate bid to slow their advance it was decided to make ten thousand perfect copies (this took a great deal of effort and resources to do) of a controversial general known for his great shrewdness and violent creativity in the area of unconventional warfare. They seeded the frontlines with his perfect xox's and it ground the alien advance to a near halt! John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Sun Mar 23 22:14:11 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:14:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803231144r51e06de9rd7f954a5c77538bd@mail.gmail.co m> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803231144r51e06de9rd7f954a5c77538bd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1206310537_3194@S1.cableone.net> At 11:44 AM 3/23/2008, you wrote: >Damien, your prime minister's words were very powerful and deeply >touching. I just hope he can make good on such sentiment. I >recommend Lee Corbin watch the superbly disturbing film, >"Rabbit-Proof Fence." Are there any movies/documentaries you would >recommend to those of us trying to understand this problem? For those less video oriented, there are a number of good articles to get the other side of the story. One I think is highly worth reading is here: http://cniss.wustl.edu/workshoppapers/gatpres1.pdf Here is some from Araz Gat's article: "Ausis our largest, continent-size, 'pure' laboratory of simple hunter-gatherers, which before Western arrival was totally unaffected by contact with farmers or herders. . . . the Aborigines . . . were in fact 'restricted nomads', or 'centrally based wanderers', confined for life to their ancestral home territories.5 "The human - like animal - tendency for maximizing reproduction was constantly checked by resource scarcity and competition, largely by cospecifics. This competition was partly about nourishment, the basic and most critical somatic activity of all living creatures, which often causes dramatic fluctuations in their numbers. Resource competition, and conflict, is not, however, a given quantity but a highly modulated variable. They change over time and place in relation to the varying nature of the resources available and of human population patterns in diverse ecological habitats (Durham 1976; Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978; Dawson 1996: 25). The basic question, then, is what the factors that act as the main brakes on human populations in any particular habitat are; what the main scarcities, stresses, and hence objects of human competition, are. Again, the answer to this question is not fixed but varies considerably in relation to the conditions. In arid and semi-arid environments, like those of Central Australia, where human population density was also very low, water holes were often the main cause of resource competition and conflict. They were obviously critical in times of drought, when whole groups of Aborigines are recorded to have perished. For this reason, however, there was a tendency to control them even when stress was less pressing. For example, as Meggitt recorded (1962: 42), between the Walbiri and Waringari hunter-gatherers of the mid-Australian Desert, whose population density was as low as one person per 35 square mile, relatively large-scale fighting, to the order of 'pitched battles' with a 'score or more dead', took place, among other reasons, in order to 'occupy' and monopolize wells. As Kimber (1990: 163) writes with respect to Aboriginal Australia: The red ochre gathering expeditions... were normally all-males parties, and although cordial relationships between groups were sought, fighting appears to have been a common hazard faced by travelling parties. One entire party, with the exception of one man, is recorded as having been ambushed and killed in about 1870, whilst in about 1874 all but one of a group of 30 men were 'entombed in the excavations'. Between groups, the picture is not very different, and is equally uniform. Warfare regularly involved stealing of women, who were then subjected to multiple rape, or taken for marriage, or both. According to Meggitt (1962: 38), if the Walbiri 'were able to surprise the enemy camps and kill or drive off the men, they carried away any women they found.' Wheeler (1910: 118, 139) specified the following motives for the frequent inter- and intra-group Aboriginal fighting: 'women, murder (most often supposed to be done by magic), and territorial trespass.' Warner wrote in his classical study, conducted in Arnhem Land in the 1920s (1937: 155): 'Warfare is one of the most important social activities of the Murngin people and surrounding tribes.' His list of causes for fighting, including 'the stealing of women', was not very different from Wheeler's. Among hunter-gatherers, women are often a strong motive for warfare, frequently the main motive, but rarely the only one. Again, women are such a prominent motive because reproductive opportunities are a very strong selective force indeed. The continent-size Australian laboratory of simple hunter-gatherers is, once more, an unmatched source of data, already cited in this connection by Darwin ([1871]: 871). Polygamy was legitimate among all the Aborigines tribes and highly desired by the men. n). snip Polygyny greatly exacerbated women's scarcity and direct and indirect male competition and conflict over them. Indeed, a cross-cultural study (Otterbein 1994: 103) has found polygyny to be one of the most distinctive correlates there is of feuding and internal warfare. Female infanticide was another factor contributing to women's scarcity and male competition. Although the number of male and female babies should be nearly equal at birth (105:100 in favour of the boys), snip Among Australian Aboriginal tribes childhood ratios of 125:100 and even 138:100 in favour of the boys were recorded (Fison and Holt 1967 [1880]: 173, 176). snip Polygyny and female infanticide thus created women scarcity and increased men's competition for them. How was this competition resolved? Partly by peaceful, albeit still oppressive means. snip Finally, however, there was also open conflict: male death in feuding and warfare. The correlation of male violent death and women's scarcity has been first pointed out by Warner in his study of the north Australian Murngin (1930-1, 1937), and later independently re-discovered and greatly elaborated by Divale and Harris (1976). During a period of 20 years, Warner (1937: 157-8) estimated death rate for the Murngin was 200 men out of a total population of 3000 of both sexes, of whom approximately 700 were adult males. This amounts to a range of 30 percent of the adult males. Violent mortality among the women and children is not mentioned. snip In this way, male and female numbers in primitive societies - highly tilted in favour of the males in childhood - tend to level out in adulthood. Violent conflict is thus one of the principal means through which competition over women is both expressed and resolved. snip ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I am not trying to make Australian Aboriginals out as either better or worse than other hunter-gather people. Indeed the material I cut about other groups was very similar. The point is that hunter-gatherer life was no bowl of cherries. Western colonizing states came along and imposed their own historically (evolutionary?) developed limitations on violence and infanticide--which had the predictable effect on population growth in places where the environment could not support a larger population in a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Are such peoples worse off or better off than they were pre contact? I could frame the question in terms such as life expectancy, but is that even the right metric? I simply don't know. There is an important though confusing lesion here for us. We are about to be "invaded" by a society far more powerful than our own. Not space aliens, but the results of our tinkering with computers till we get ones smarter than we are. I hope we fair better than the aboriginal peoples western society displaced, but I don't even know what metrics godlike AIs would use. Heck, I can't even decide what (if anything) we should do with/for hunter gatherer human groups today. Their individual choices of getting intoxicated on gasoline fumes doesn't seem like a really good idea, but who am I to make their choices? I developed this theme further in "The Clinic Seed" where a powerful AI directed clinic seduces those it "serves" right out of the physical world. I didn't reach a conclusion about it being a good or a bad idea there either. Keith From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Mar 23 22:25:27 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:25:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting Message-ID: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Please be careful not to over-post on this list. (If you are not sure if you are overposting, please see how many times your name is appearing in relation to other posts :-)) Many thanks, Natasha From hkhenson at rogers.com Sun Mar 23 22:25:44 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:25:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <47E1F688.7080700@kevinfreels.com> <470a3c520803200205neb41d5fh71cdedb3beffe80f@mail.gmail.com> <47E23297.6070601@mac.com> <272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> At 02:42 PM 3/23/2008, Damien wrote: >At 01:17 PM 3/23/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: > > >But, Damien, could you please---I promise not to demand > >yet again if you just ignore this--- *your* suggestions? > >I don't have any. But the starting point is to find out how this >horror came about and make sure not to do the same thing again. I don't think there are any such groups left. The big problem is to avoid it happening to us. Keith From citta437 at aol.com Sun Mar 23 22:37:53 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 18:37:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death { feelling/thought} Message-ID: <8CA5B4DAABEB70E-598-16C0@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> "> Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death arise from narcissistic > desire for immortality that evolved in the genetic evolution of the > human species. Lee: "I don't know how old you are, but let X = Terry's age. Then would you call your desire to continue to live well past the age X *narcissistic*? ___________ Desires to live well past whatever age is a genetic predisposition/ narcissistic/ego causing dissatisfaction/duality, mental conflict/distress. Lee: "Because I want to keep on living---forget immortality (let's say that all matter is due to disintegrate in a few trillion years) ---why does that make me narcissistic? Or does it? _____________________ My reply: Want/desire cause suffering because of misperceptions/assumptions of reality. Genes are the blue prints of DNA. This is a fact not an assumption with existing evidence which can be tested by the scientific method. > What makes us humans who fear death? Lee: Those in the EEA who didn't fear death often did not leave behind as many viable offspring. That's why. Clear enough? No, what is EEA? _____ Lee: "Speaking very precisely, and not in the usual manner, it's not death at all that I'm afraid of. I merely regret not getting to go on living. Do you have a problem with that?" My reply: There is cellular death and the deaths of thoughts as in trauma, dementia and there are those so called living dead who are comatose, asleep or during general anesthesia. The problem is when you failed to wake up during general anesthesia, stayed comatose till all neurons and body system all declined or become irreversible. > Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates according to the recent > study/findings of the scientific method of investigation. The other 2% > {a well -developed cortex} makes all the difference between humans and > the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the potentiality to > reason, to use technological advancement and a language/scientific > method to investigate beliefs of reality, thoughts and memes. Lee: "Yes. And reason tells me that if my life is worth living for a certain (future) interval Y - X, then I would rather be alive than dead during that interval. Is there a particular reason that you don't want to be alive during the interval 2350 A.D. - 2650 A.D.?" __________ My reply: Who does'nt? Of course, I want to be alive with all my faculties for thinking and feeling intact. Time does not exist permanently. Feelings and thoughts change in time. We are thoughts/feelings changing all the time. IF you cling to time past and future, you suffer for fear of losing a memory, a thought as well as a feeling of security. Terry {sometimes secure and insecure} :-} From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 00:47:40 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 19:47:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 23 March 2008, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Please be careful not to over-post on this list. (If you are not sure > if you are overposting, please see how many times your name is > appearing in relation to other posts :-)) http://heybryan.org/stats/2008-03-23-extropy-chat.html People who have written most messages: Author Msg Percent 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % 2 lcorbin at rawbw.com 346 6.60 % 3 kanzure at gmail.com 324 6.18 % 4 thespike at satx.rr.com 283 5.40 % 5 hkhenson at rogers.com 216 4.12 % 6 stefano.vaj at gmail.com 203 3.87 % 7 amara at amara.com 195 3.72 % 8 eugen at leitl.org 185 3.53 % 9 jef at jefallbright.net 162 3.09 % 10 stathisp at gmail.com 158 3.02 % Huh. Guess I have to trim it down a bit. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From mbb386 at main.nc.us Mon Mar 24 02:20:47 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 22:20:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] mb's story In-Reply-To: <200803231529.m2NFTGjX010355@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803231529.m2NFTGjX010355@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <35587.12.77.168.243.1206325247.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> spike writes: > MB, this is why I am being annoyingly nosey about this. I am writing up my > family's history. I have discovered a distant cousin who is going > overboard. I volunteered to compile his family history. Turned out to be a > big job. I have over 200 pages so far (if I printed out the microsloth word > file) and I am only a third of the way thru what he has already written. > But they are some really good stories. He was born on a subsistence farm in > Idaho in the depths of the great depression of the 1930s. > > Even if you choose not to share it here (and that's OK too) MB I urge you > and everyone here to collect as much family info as you still can and get it > recorded in a digital file, along with photos etc. Do it for your own > offspring, even if you personally don't get along well with your ancestors > or offspring. It might be your most important legacy. > Spike, I have in my possession some 25 typewritten and xeroxed hand written "books" of genealogy from both sides of my family. It was one of my grandfather's passions which the younger of my brothers has taken on. I have the "emergency backup copies" of the stuff hardest to replace. Letters, letters, letters. Various certificates and licenses and awards. Photographs. Bits and pieces of family lore. The man I wrote of who came here made his way as a shoemaker. Good luck working with your project. It can be quite a fascinating subject and also can make one think. Regards, MB From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 03:38:26 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 20:38:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 3:25 PM, hkhenson wrote: > I don't think there are any such groups left. > The big problem is to avoid it happening to us. The key is empathy. When I read about the stolen generations, all I could think of was what it would be like to be the mother of a child, or the child herself, literally ripped from their mother's arms by armed men, never to see their family again. I can guarantee that those who implemented the policy couldn't have imagined nor cared less what the Aborigines were thinking or feeling, because they were not regarded as fully human and therefore not capable of the same thoughts and feelings. The few in power who did empathize at the time were the few who protested the policy. Humans need empathy. AIs need empathy. PJ From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 24 04:11:37 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:11:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com > References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323225302.05939920@satx.rr.com> At 08:38 PM 3/23/2008 -0700, PJ wrote: >I can guarantee that >those who implemented the policy couldn't have imagined nor cared less >what the Aborigines were thinking or feeling, because they were not >regarded as fully human and therefore not capable of the same thoughts >and feelings. Probably wrong there, PJ, unless "less evolved" equals "subhuman" which I doubt was the belief. This was going on in the 20th century; the reasoning seems to have been that they were a "dying race" and this was part of a snobbish attempt to "smooth the pillow" under their doomed heads (as a phrase from 1938 put it).## Of course they were supposed to have no culture worth mentioning, and they needed Xian salvation, so it wasn't as if the abducted kids weren't getting a great heavenly and worldly bargain, whether they were to be adopted or raised in orphanages to be servants. As I understand it, the stolen kids had to have, or look as if they had, a white parent or grandparent (Thomas Jefferson, as it were, having dropped his seed). There's still a huge controversy about all this among historians of different political stripe in Oz, but nobody seems to think there was any denial that Aborigines were fully human (of a lowly and debased kind) and deserving of a decent Christian upbringing. If it broke their mothers' hearts--well, hearts and omelettes. Damien Broderick ## A review that looks useful: From max at maxmore.com Mon Mar 24 04:18:12 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:18:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] New comic: Transhuman #1 Message-ID: <20080324041814.IXIQ21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> For those with any interest in "comic books" (or, more pompously and defensively, "sequential art"): This Wednesday ("new comix day" to those of us who collect) March 26, the first issue of a comic called "Transhuman" comes out, published by Image Comics. "A story that covers the discovery of superhuman genetic engineering, the companies built on the back of that discovery and the marketing war to bring it into each and every one of our homes. Illustrated by JM RINGUET, TRANSHUMAN is a mockumentary told in the same vein as the great Christopher Guest movies Spinal Tap and Best in Show." I make no assurances as to the transhumanist or extropic qualities of this comic, but it should be interesting to check out. Max Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 07:28:16 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 02:28:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] New comic: Transhuman #1 In-Reply-To: <20080324041814.IXIQ21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> References: <20080324041814.IXIQ21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <200803240228.16449.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 23 March 2008, Max More wrote: > I make no assurances as to the transhumanist or extropic qualities of > this comic, but it should be interesting to check out. Do we get a sample? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 10:34:37 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:34:37 +0000 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Sunday 23 March 2008, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > Please be careful not to over-post on this list. (If you are not sure > > if you are overposting, please see how many times your name is > > appearing in relation to other posts :-)) > > http://heybryan.org/stats/2008-03-23-extropy-chat.html > > People who have written most messages: Author Msg Percent > 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % Quick! Call the moderator! Oh-oh. He *is* the moderator. ;) > Huh. Guess I have to trim it down a bit. > - Bryan Not necessarily. The reference is to the 'EXTROPY-CHAT LIST GUIDELINES'. Here: Quote: Given the number of subscribers to the Extropy-Chat mailing list, we strongly recommend that you restrain yourself to a MAXIMUM of eight posts per day. Those who exceed the eight posts per day limit will receive a private warning. Repeat offenders will be subject to other measures such as temporary or permanent bans from the list. ---------------- Posting too much is not measured against annual totals or length of messages (though people will complain about over-long messages and probably skip over most of the content). It is just that sometimes people get caught up in the enthusiasm of the discussion and get into treating the list like an instant messaging system or a phone call. I believe, that to help raise list quality, posts are supposed to be written after some consideration, not fired off in machine gun style. Personally I write many furious tirades totally demolishing every post that I have the slightest disagreement with. I am a legend in my own living-room. Luckily I have covered my delete key with a sticker saying 'POST NOW!' BillK From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 10:35:55 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:35:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] SL-Transhumanists David Pearce in Second Life on Utopian Neuroscience, March 23 In-Reply-To: <470a3c520803170309m6d32f5d5o76bd7db90181c88a@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520803170309m6d32f5d5o76bd7db90181c88a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803240335g418d6205hccd4d9cca3cae960@mail.gmail.com> http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/david_pearce_in_second_life_on_utopian_neuroscience_march_23/ http://translook.com/ http://superhappiness.com/ Video clip: http://metaxlr8.com:81/streams/davidpearcesl230308.html David Pearce, co-founder of the WTA and creator of HedWeb (The Hedonistic Imperative), gave a talk and a Q/A session in Second Life yesterday March 23, 10am SLT, on Utopian Neuroscience. A summary of David's talk is on his website Superhappiness. David promotes nothing less than the abolition of suffering in all sentient life. He argues that the abolition of suffering can be accomplished through Paradise Engineering (The Hedonistic Imperative). David will try to distinguish between the Abolitionist Project -i.e. getting rid of suffering, from a much more controversial claim: "I predict that our superintelligent descendants will be animated by gradients of bliss orders of magnitude richer than anything physiologically accessible today". About 35 transhumanists attended the presentation and asked many question on utopian neuroscience, the meaning of happiness, the place of superhappiness among transhumanist goals, existing and available ways to enhance mood and happiness, future developments, and transhumanism in general. There was no time to answer all questions but Dave promised to show up at one of the next SL-Transhumanists office hours to discuss more. Wikipedia: "David Pearce is a British philosopher and negative utilitarian. He promotes the abolition of suffering in all sentient life. His book-length internet manifesto The Hedonistic Imperative[1] details how he believes the abolition of suffering can be accomplished through "paradise engineering". A transhumanist vegan, Pearce also calls for the elimination of cruelty to animals. Among his websites, there are many devoted to the plight of animals". Video clip of parts of Dave's talk and Q/A The next speaker will be Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association, on March 30. Starting from this next event we wish to record the full audio of presentations and Q/A sessions and making them available on the web and in SL as mp3 audio podcasts, please get in touch with us if you wish to help. SL-Transhumanists @ Extropia Core From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 11:02:59 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:02:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] New comic: Transhuman #1 In-Reply-To: <200803240228.16449.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <20080324041814.IXIQ21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <200803240228.16449.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Sunday 23 March 2008, Max More wrote: > > I make no assurances as to the transhumanist or extropic qualities of > > this comic, but it should be interesting to check out. > > Do we get a sample? > It's not an on-line comic and it's not published yet. In Stores the week of March 26, 2008 Hardcopy 3.50 USD 32 pages. Very first (enthusiastic) review: Quote: Jonathan Hickman is the most exciting comic writer to come on the scene in some time. Coming out of nowhere, he hit us with the media terrorism of The Nightly News and has continued his thought provoking work in the phenomenal time traveling story of a Catholic Special Forces army in Pax Romana. Here, he takes on big themes once again. Transhuman is a scathing indictment of the pharmaceutical industry and the leeches of ailing people that it produces. ------------------ First five pages sample: (1.2 MB PDF) ------------ BillK From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 11:20:00 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:20:00 +0000 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323225302.05939920@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323225302.05939920@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 4:11 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Probably wrong there, PJ, unless "less evolved" equals "subhuman" > which I doubt was the belief. This was going on in the 20th century; > the reasoning seems to have been that they were a "dying race" and > this was part of a snobbish attempt to "smooth the pillow" under > their doomed heads (as a phrase from 1938 put it).## Of course they > were supposed to have no culture worth mentioning, and they needed > Xian salvation, so it wasn't as if the abducted kids weren't getting > a great heavenly and worldly bargain, whether they were to be adopted > or raised in orphanages to be servants. > There's still a huge controversy about all this among historians of > different political stripe in Oz, but nobody seems to think there was > any denial that Aborigines were fully human (of a lowly and debased > kind) and deserving of a decent Christian upbringing. If it broke > their mothers' hearts--well, hearts and omelettes. > Isn't there a great risk that a posthuman society will think about us ordinary humans in much the same fashion? If you were a posthuman scientist, wouldn't you want to try to uplift the children at least, to give them the opportunity to join posthuman society? I expect the people in this list will be clamouring at the door 'Me first! Me first!', but less knowledgeable people might be very reluctant to leave their old ways behind. We can say now that they have their right to choose and should be left alone, and other PC platitudes, but think about it. A posthuman will know and experience wonders that at present we can only dimly guess at. Should uplift be denied, because the oldies don't understand, are fearful of change, etc. etc.? It is not an easy question to answer. BillK From stathisp at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 12:08:48 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:08:48 +1100 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323225302.05939920@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 24/03/2008, BillK wrote: > Isn't there a great risk that a posthuman society will think about us > ordinary humans in much the same fashion? > > If you were a posthuman scientist, wouldn't you want to try to uplift > the children at least, to give them the opportunity to join posthuman > society? > > I expect the people in this list will be clamouring at the door 'Me > first! Me first!', but less knowledgeable people might be very > reluctant to leave their old ways behind. We can say now that they > have their right to choose and should be left alone, and other PC > platitudes, but think about it. > > A posthuman will know and experience wonders that at present we can > only dimly guess at. > Should uplift be denied, because the oldies don't understand, are > fearful of change, etc. etc.? > > It is not an easy question to answer. It wouldn't be so bad if, from the start, the indigenous people were treated as equals. To an extent, this explains the better position, then and now, of the Maori in New Zealand compared to the Australian Aboriginals. The Maori were warriors, relatively more numerous and better organised, and the Pakeha colonisers took them seriously enough to agree to a treaty in 1840 with the Maori chiefs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_waitangi). Still, many Maori today consider the colonisers murderers and land thieves, which undoubtedly some were. Better not to be colonised. -- Stathis Papaioannou From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 24 13:57:41 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 06:57:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death { feelling/thought} References: <8CA5B4DAABEB70E-598-16C0@webmail-nc07.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <669b01c88db7$19990750$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes >> > Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death >> > arise from narcissistic desire for immortality >> > that evolved in the genetic evolution of the >> > human species. Later on, by the way, it becomes less clear what you mean by "narcissistic". It's usually used somewhat pejoratively in English. Naturally, I do *not* at all consider desires for living in the far future---even if that were to mean living so long as the universe does---as "narcissistic", unless one would consider any life extension or even any increase in personal standard of living to be so. And then one would be guilty of using the words in a very non-standard way. > [Lee wrote] > > > I don't know how old you are, but let X = Terry's age. Then > > Then would you call your desire to continue to live well past the > > age X *narcissistic*? > > Desires to live well past whatever age is a genetic predisposition/ > narcissistic/ego causing dissatisfaction/duality, mental conflict/distress. Pardon my French, but that really sounds like a lot of BS. It sounds as though you are evading the question. Do you or do you not approve of people trying to keep on living? If so, why call it narcissism? Do you or do you not approve of people seeking immortality for themselves and those they love, or, indeed, for everyone? Would you call that "narcissistic"? (You did before.) > [Lee again] > > Because I want to keep on living---forget immortality (let's > > say that all matter is due to disintegrate in a few trillion years) > > ---why does that make me narcissistic? Or does it? > > My reply: Want/desire cause suffering because of misperceptions/ > assumptions of reality. Genes are the blue prints of DNA. This is a > fact not an assumption with existing evidence which can > be tested by the scientific method. You wax from the banal "genes are the blue prints of DNA" to the zen-like crap of "wants cause suffering because of [bad] assumptions about reality", which really is a load. What a preposterous statement. Because, say, an animal wants to get a drink of water, or (if it's a chimp, say, to settle an old score with a rival), this necessarily causes suffering because of "misperceptions/assumptions" of reality? Please. > What makes us humans who fear death? > > > Those in the EEA who didn't fear death often did not leave behind > > as many viable offspring. That's why. Clear enough? > > No, what is EEA? Sorry. It's the Environment of Evolutionary Adaptedness, supposed to be ~1.8 million B.C. to 200,000 B.C., or something like that. The interval where we got most of our built-in instincts and traits which make us human. It's the interval that the EP folks are always focusing on. So my statement is just what you were saying already, but just in different language, I suspect. > Lee: > > Speaking very precisely, and not in the usual manner, it's > > not death at all that I'm afraid of. I merely regret not getting > > to go on living. Do you have a problem with that?" > > My reply: There is cellular death and the deaths of thoughts as in > trauma, dementia and there are those so called living dead who are > comatose, asleep or during general anesthesia. The problem is when you > failed to wake up during general anesthesia, stayed comatose till all > neurons and body system all declined or become irreversible. You seem to have evaded my question. I will *certainly* agree that it is a BIG problem if you fail to wake up after general anesthesia, but that's because it means you die. Me, I have problem with that. What criticisms do you have, again, for those who want to keep on living, forever if possible? (Here "criticism" is positive analysis and probing, as used in Pan Critical Rationalism, PCR.) So it's narcissistic? Well, what isn't? > Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates > according to the recent study/findings of the scientific > method of investigation. The other 2% {a well -developed > cortex} makes all the difference between humans and > the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the > potentiality to reason, to use technological advancement > and a language/scientific method to investigate beliefs of > reality, thoughts and memes. Yes. That's actually pretty old hat, but yes, I agree. This is the sort of level of knowledge that you should assume that the readers here already know quite well. > Lee: > > And reason tells me that if my life is worth living > > for a certain (future) interval Y - X, then I would > > rather be alive than dead during that interval. Is > > there a particular reason that you don't want to > > be alive during the interval 2350 A.D. - 2650 A.D.?" > > My reply: Who doesn't? Lots of religious people would rather be dead by then. Lots of other people, e.g. Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke had other rationalizations (very clever ones, of course) for prefering non-existence. > Of course, I want to be alive with all my faculties for > thinking and feeling intact. I'm glad to hear that! Even in the far future, I take it? Does this mean that you are an opponent of dying? > Time does not exist permanently. That is the sort of statement that should seriously, seriously, be deleted upon a re-reading just before you click on "send". What on Earth are your poor readers to think of such a claim??? Have mercy. > Feelings and thoughts change in time. Back to the banal. > We are thoughts/feelings changing all the time. IF you > cling to time past and future, you suffer for fear of > losing a memory, a thought as well as a feeling of security. True enough. Do you happen to cling to time (past and future) in such a way that you, Terry, also suffer for fear of losing your, say, memories? Or have you evolved beyond that? I can't tell from your words. Sometimes you just drop these platitudes without taking any kind of personal stand, so that the reader is perplexed. In other words, do you approve or not of people being afraid of losing memory? > Terry {sometimes secure and insecure} :-} :-) Aren't we all! Lee From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 15:40:32 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:40:32 -0600 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47E7CB70.6040909@insightbb.com> Everyone likes to bash the US - until they want something. I'd love to see your specific explanation of how the US spreads dictatorship and economic slavery. Can you please give some specific examples? Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On 23/03/2008, Dagon Gmail wrote: > >> So when murrca is magically reduced to a wasteland of fine ashy >> powder and all people, buildings, roads, everything in it is away to >> oblivion, suddenly the world will be overrun by dictators? >> >> Laughable, delusional. I am personally convinced of precisely the >> opposite. The institute of the US is an exploitative device that SPREADS >> dictatorship, economic slavery and war as a typhoid Mary spreads >> infection. >> > > I wouldn't go that far, there have been worse imperial powers. But > it's important to ask, why do so many people around the world feel > this way, even those in wealthy countries not adversely affected by > decisions in Washington? > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 15:49:59 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:49:59 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Race Biology In-Reply-To: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> References: <47E65801.6020305@lineone.net> Message-ID: <47E7CDA7.4070402@insightbb.com> That's what I regularly put on my loan applications and such. In the US they have government "monitoring" to ensure equal opportunity, so at the end of such things as loan applications there is a race and sex section. It asks if you are male or female, and then your race. Finally it asks if you are or are not hispanic or latino. Not sure why that question is seperate. One can check as many boxes as apply. I encourage my children to do the same thing at school where they ask such questions. We all respnd to such things by marking "all of the above" - so we're caucasian african american asian native american latinos. Of course that may not be entirely accurate. I can't say for certain that I have native american or asian heritage. It's more likely that my ancestors diverged prior to the seperations that caused the distinctions attributed to these "races". But it's also very possible that someone in my ancestry was asian and/or native american given the number of ancestors I have. ben wrote: > "Lee Corbin" declared: > > >> Yes, there are racists who'd maintain that the reality is that >> because she has "some black blood" that makes her black. >> They're using the words in the way that we describe clean >> water and contaminated water: if you mix three gallons of >> of clean water with one gallon of contaminated water, then >> you have four gallons of contaminated water. >> > > > > > This is hilarious. Or it would be if it wasn't so tragic. > > It also means that we are all black. Every one of us, without exception. > (reminds me of Steve Martin in one of his earlier films, when he was > still funny. The Screwup, or The Failure, something like that, where > he's surprised to learn that he's not black. (See? Spike was right! I'm > composing this offline, and i don't have any god-like powers of knowing > what Steve Martin's films are called!)) > > ben zaiboc > > (The Klutz? > The Lame-o? > The Retard? > The Upfuck? - ok, clutching at straws now) > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 14:49:42 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:49:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803240749r24f5766cl2c2a495a7aa2065c@mail.gmail.com> Damien wrote: I don't have any. But the starting point is to find out how this horror came about and make sure not to do the same thing again. >>> Arghhh!! ; ) In Alaska a ton of money was spent to raise the standard of living and greatly upgrade the living conditions of the native villages (fortunately we have lots of oil money). Free medical treatment was given and education was made a big priority. Teachers who volunteer for a few years to teach among the native villages get loan forgiveness. And many teachers consider this a great experience. There are a number of organizations/clubs, which tutor native students at various levels in the educational ladder and encourage them to not drop out but instead excel academically. Crime, especially sexual abuse, violence against women, neglect of children and substance abuse, have been and still are large problems. Even with the financial resources of the state, it is hard to properly seek out, punish/and or treat those with these criminal tendancies. The vast distances involved and the cultural barriers add to this dilemma. Native Alaskan young people (especially the promising ones who attend college/some form of higher education) must decide whether to stay in the village setting, or relocate to an Alaskan "big" city like Anchorage, or move even further out as they make a life/family/career for themselves. I had friends growing up whose parents lived in Anchorage (village life was largely alien to them), took part in the larger society, and yet tried at least to some degree to stay in touch with their culture through various Native Alaskan social/fraternal organizations. And so for these young people it was a "natural thing" at some level live in two worlds. I have noticed that military service was an excellent way for many Alaskan natives to integrate with American society. They took great pride in having served and some even made a career out of it. I was very disappointed when the Army decided to discontinue two elite arctic warfare scout units that had been made up mostly of natives and had been established to help repel a possible Japanese invasion of the Alaskan mainland. It had been a tradition for several generations in some Alaskan native families to serve in these outfits. John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 16:03:10 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:03:10 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death { feelling/thought} Terry In-Reply-To: <8CA5B1179A175D0-10FC-1668@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5B1179A175D0-10FC-1668@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <47E7D0BE.7020203@insightbb.com> Fear of death is necessary. If it weren't for the fear of death, no one would bother conquering it. Our only concern would be reproduction. Fear of death is a basic primal instinct and without it, science never would have developed. Many "believers" as you call them do NOT fear death. They are more of a problem because this leads to martyrdom and other such nonsense. Our ability to see from other's point of view allows us to not only fear our own death, but to fear the death of others FOR them. This helps to move people beyond selfishness and narcissism. Fear of death is simple to understand. What I find interesting is our enjoyment of things that bring us to the edge of death without killing us. Why do we enjoy things like skydiving, roller coasters, fast cars, fighting, sports, etc? In all the other animals exposure to fear only creates more fear. In us, it seems to be the opposite - that which doesn't kill us makes us "bolder". citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death arise from narcissistic > desire for immortality that evolved in the genetic evolution of the > human species. What makes us humans who fear death? > > Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates according to the recent > study/findings of the scientific method of investigation. The other 2% > {a well -developed cortex} makes all the difference between humans and > the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the potentiality to > reason, to use technological advancement and a language/scientific > method to investigate beliefs of reality, thoughts and memes. > > Science is neither a belief nor unbelief. It is a practice of > awareness/objectivity using reason/logic in combination of advancing > technology to test theories about nature including us. Some humans fear > death and some don't depending on how the brain processes behave in > spacetime of micro and macro levels of interactions. > > Some believers continue to suffer due to fear of pain of aging and > death. > > Terry > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 15:08:57 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:08:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803240808y55a7e62dg35a74959a3e34718@mail.gmail.com> I will have to be more careful when it comes to keeping track of my postings. I had thought the daily limit was ten. But now I know it's eight! I recall when Mike Lorrey was the posting monster. lol Does anyone remember the cool graphic Anders Sandberg created to show the quantity and interrelatedness of posts? Bryan Bishop shared: 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % 2 lcorbin at rawbw.com 346 6.60 % 3 kanzure at gmail.com 324 6.18 % 4 thespike at satx.rr.com 283 5.40 % 5 hkhenson at rogers.com 216 4.12 % 6 stefano.vaj at gmail.com 203 3.87 % 7 amara at amara.com 195 3.72 % 8 eugen at leitl.org 185 3.53 % 9 jef at jefallbright.net 162 3.09 % 10 stathisp at gmail.com 158 3.02 % >>>>> Hey, everyone on this list writes alot of *excellent* posts! I'm sure not going to complain. : ) John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 16:15:05 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:15:05 -0600 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <47E7D389.8060909@insightbb.com> > The sooner the failed experiment which is the US -- perpetual war and > worship of militarism, faux democracy, pervasive disconnect from > reality, narcissistic self-absorption and American "exeptionalism" -- > is bankrupted and utterly discredited, the sooner the next batch of > folks can start fresh. John McCain will get us there faster. He gets > my vote. > > "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran." > > That's the ticket. > > Best, Jeff Davis > > The fall of the US would not benefit anyone. Many more would be hurt. There would be MORE war, MORE famine, MORE of all those things you detest as the structure collapsed. Markets around the world would be ruined. Is this really the solution? Have you thought this through? I have a suggestion. How about developing your own better alternative, and then in a real democracy pull it together and prove that it's better? When others realize how perfect and right your solution is they will follow. From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Mar 24 16:07:19 2008 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:07:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080324160519.TQXC21550.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> I'm not a strong supporter of statistics because often the person collecting them has an ulterior motive. (A typical problem for ethnography as well.) Regardless, Bryan's stats are reflective of list postings; but the stats are not accurately describing the overposting because overposting is based on daily postings, not overall postings for a period of time. For example. Spike could post 6 messages every day, while most list members only post 2 a day. But Sam could post 12 in one day and no posts on other days. Sam is the one who is overposting, not Spike. The list rules are 8 posts maximum a day. That might be too much in some instances where the topic is bland and the posts have low content, and too little when there is a hot topic with meaningful content in the posts. Long and short, our dear John was the one overposting. Natasha From jonkc at att.net Mon Mar 24 15:58:20 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:58:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com><200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com><2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com><004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> John Grigg Wrote: > please remember that I am hardly alone in my view on this. Indeed you are not! Even on this list, with members more enlightened than 99% of the general population, my view is still in the distinct minority. I'm right nevertheless. However in one way it doesn't matter; even if you're right (you're not) your meme about identity has no future. Right or wrong people and machines with memes like mine will not be afraid of radical upgrading and will hopelessly out-compete beings with memes like yours. I'll probably get chopped up by the Singularity anyway just like most people, but at least I have a chance, you have none. > Keep in mind the story of the scientist with the newly created perfect > duplicate, who is totally convinced they are one and the same, and > the rival researcher who makes his point by taking out of a desk > drawer a .44 magnum. If the two were really identical they would both pull out a gun at the same instant and point it at each other. In your scenario the two are radically different, one is violent and one is not, one is undergoing a terrifying experience and one is not. > It's a high-tech alternative to the very old option of having a > child as one's personal immortality vehicle. No, it's the same idea that your identity remains intact even after you went to the dentist and had anesthesia to extract a tooth. John K Clark From kuromaku at hush.com Mon Mar 24 16:57:41 2008 From: kuromaku at hush.com (kuromaku at hush.com) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:57:41 +0200 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." Message-ID: <20080324165742.155C42003D@mailserver7.hushmail.com> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:49:42 +0200 John Grigg wrote: >I have noticed that military service was an excellent way for many >Alaskan >natives to integrate with American society. They took great pride >in having >served and some even made a career out of it. I was very >disappointed when >the Army decided to discontinue two elite arctic warfare scout >units that >had been made up mostly of natives and had been established to >help repel a >possible Japanese invasion of the Alaskan mainland. It had been a >tradition >for several generations in some Alaskan native families to serve >in these >outfits. Uh, let me get this straight, you think it would be a good idea to force taxpayers to continue to pay even more each year just to make it possible for those native parasites, who almost certainly would not be of any real value to other, mostly non-native, taxpayers, to basically multiply at their expense (knowing the infantile mentality of most military people), instead of allowing those who could actually do something beneficial in a modern society (if Alaska can be considered such) to prosper? Gee, I would think your nukes would be enough to keep the Japanese at bay these days. But I guess that's just me thinking foolish -- Let the sun shine in! Click now for a beautiful new sunroom! http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/REAK6ZBOGcN4THnLeX63m6odVOtYLccCnn38av9QaPaCDGspfm7JTA/ thoughts. From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 24 16:58:56 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:58:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc><200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803240808y55a7e62dg35a74959a3e34718@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <66aa01c88dd0$5dbc3ab0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> I can't believe Spike beat me out by just 2 (!) posts. Man, I can do better than that. I've been spending too much time on SL4. That must be what happened. But this list is where my heart lies. :-) Unfortunately, I have to go to work now. And then, alas, company this coming week. It's going to be a while before I'm back in form, I'm afraid. Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: John Grigg To: ExI chat list Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:08 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] META: Overposting I will have to be more careful when it comes to keeping track of my postings. I had thought the daily limit was ten. But now I know it's eight! I recall when Mike Lorrey was the posting monster. lol Does anyone remember the cool graphic Anders Sandberg created to show the quantity and interrelatedness of posts? Bryan Bishop shared: 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % 2 lcorbin at rawbw.com 346 6.60 % 3 kanzure at gmail.com 324 6.18 % 4 thespike at satx.rr.com 283 5.40 % 5 hkhenson at rogers.com 216 4.12 % 6 stefano.vaj at gmail.com 203 3.87 % 7 amara at amara.com 195 3.72 % 8 eugen at leitl.org 185 3.53 % 9 jef at jefallbright.net 162 3.09 % 10 stathisp at gmail.com 158 3.02 % >>>>> Hey, everyone on this list writes alot of *excellent* posts! I'm sure not going to complain. : ) John Grigg _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 17:19:07 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:19:07 +0000 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: <66aa01c88dd0$5dbc3ab0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803240808y55a7e62dg35a74959a3e34718@mail.gmail.com> <66aa01c88dd0$5dbc3ab0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > I've been spending too much time on SL4. That must > be what happened. But this list is where my heart lies. :-) > Dearie, dearie me. Now Lee, you know that posting on SL4 does your head in. You'll probably end up churning out loads of post-modern philosophy about which identical twin is more identical or whether rocks are intelligent and what is exactly the meaning of 'rock' or 'intelligent. Oh - I've just had a look at SL4. You have. Hope you get well soon. ;) BillK From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 17:28:58 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:28:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. In-Reply-To: <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> John K. Clark wrote: Indeed you are not! Even on this list, with members more enlightened than 99% of the general population, my view is still in the distinct minority. I'm right nevertheless. >>> John, your humility about your views is nearly overpowering! ; ) you continued in a prior post: I said it before I'll say it again, if you can't overcome that superstition it will kill you dead dead dead. The Singularity will simply not allow a conscious being with ideas like that to survive... >>> Ahhh, but memes/superstitions have a way of adapting to new situations... And so I just might survive. you continued: However in one way it doesn't matter; even if you're right (you're not) your meme about identity has no future. Right or wrong people and machines with memes like mine will not be afraid of radical upgrading and will hopelessly out-compete beings with memes like yours. I'll probably get chopped up by the Singularity anyway just like most people, but at least I have a chance, you have none. >>> I'm not so sure people and machines with memes like yours will out-compete beings with memes like me. I do like the idea of upgrading/copying/uploading myself, but I see the results as a "mind child/brother" of mine and not truly *me.* Keep in mind, I have the urge/meme to "go forth and multiply (watch out!)" and so like many people in the world it will be channeled into new paths with these incredible Singularity technologies coming down the road. It will be a matter of semantics when the dust clears, so don't count me out just yet when it comes to the Singularity chopping block. A century from now I will say to you, "this is my mind family, we are pleased to meet you," and you will reply with, "I/we are here, greetings." John Grigg wrote: It's a high-tech alternative to the very old option of having a child as one's personal immortality vehicle. >>> you replied: No, it's the same idea that your identity remains intact even after you went to the dentist and had anesthesia to extract a tooth. >>> NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! LOL The self-circuit has not been permanently broken when you go under anesthetic and then regain consciousness. John Grigg : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 18:41:48 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:41:48 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <20080324165742.155C42003D@mailserver7.hushmail.com> References: <20080324165742.155C42003D@mailserver7.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <47E7F5EC.9030005@insightbb.com> > (knowing the infantile > mentality of most military people), > Can you please support this statement ? From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 17:52:49 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:52:49 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Is it real or a hoax (Medicine's Cutting Edge: Re-Growing Organs)? References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com><200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com><2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com><004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer><2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com><009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <030a01c88dd7$e1cbe420$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/22/sunday/main3960219.shtml (...) Three years ago, Lee Spievack sliced off the tip of his finger in the propeller of a hobby shop airplane. What happened next, Andrews reports, propelled him into the future of medicine. Spievack's brother, Alan, a medical research scientist, sent him a special powder and told him to sprinkle it on the wound. "I powdered it on until it was covered," Spievack recalled. To his astonishment, every bit of his fingertip grew back. "Your finger grew back," Andrews asked Spievack, "flesh, blood, vessels and nail?" "Four weeks," he answered. (...) From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 17:57:22 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:57:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <47E7F5EC.9030005@insightbb.com> References: <20080324165742.155C42003D@mailserver7.hushmail.com> <47E7F5EC.9030005@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803241057k786b318cub669919492fe6a52@mail.gmail.com> kuromaku wrote: Uh, let me get this straight, you think it would be a good idea to force taxpayers to continue to pay even more each year just to make it possible for those native parasites, who almost certainly would not be of any real value to other, mostly non-native, taxpayers, to basically multiply at their expense (knowing the infantile mentality of most military people), instead of allowing those who could actually do something beneficial in a modern society (if Alaska can be considered such) to prosper? >>> *Your statement is just plain *racist* against Alaskan natives and insulting to those serving their nations in the military. Alaska became the 49th state of the United States of America in 1959 (just in case you weren't aware...) and is definitely a modern society.* you sadly continue: Gee, I would think your nukes would be enough to keep the Japanese at bay these days. But I guess that's just me thinking foolish >>> *The Japanese are obviously strong U.S. allies now, but during WWII that was a totally different story. The Native Alaskan arctic warfare units were kept around to do search and rescue, defend against Soviet aggression (when there was a Soviet Union), and to be possibly used in foreign peacekeeping deployments set in very cold climes.* *John Grigg* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 18:24:18 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:24:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: References: <20080323222327.FIG1399.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@natasha-39y28ni.natasha.cc> <200803231947.41101.kanzure@gmail.com> <2d6187670803240808y55a7e62dg35a74959a3e34718@mail.gmail.com> <66aa01c88dd0$5dbc3ab0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <2d6187670803241124o7819bfb3t96517cdb09dca2cd@mail.gmail.com> Natasha Vita-More wrote: The list rules are 8 posts maximum a day. That might be too much in some instances where the topic is bland and the posts have low content, and too little when there is a hot topic with meaningful content in the posts. Long and short, our dear John was the one overposting. >>> I suppose I am guilty as charged based on a "spirit of the law" perspective on things as compared to the "legalistic" view (then I would be innocent and not facing the possibility down the road of banishment to the Phantom Zone). Hey, can I blame Spike? He encourages my misbehavior! ; ) Oh, wait..., *I* encourage my misbehavior... John Grigg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 19:34:38 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:34:38 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Is it real or a hoax (Medicine's Cutting Edge: Re-Growing Organs)? In-Reply-To: <030a01c88dd7$e1cbe420$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> <030a01c88dd7$e1cbe420$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Message-ID: <47E8024E.6030603@insightbb.com> Real. Certainly. Fingertips aren't a problem. Sometimes they grow back with no help at all. It's when you get into the next joint that you run into problems. Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/22/sunday/main3960219.shtml > > > (...) > Three years ago, Lee Spievack sliced off the tip of his finger in the > propeller of a hobby shop airplane. > > What happened next, Andrews reports, propelled him into the future of > medicine. Spievack's brother, Alan, a medical research scientist, sent him a > special powder and told him to sprinkle it on the wound. > > "I powdered it on until it was covered," Spievack recalled. > > To his astonishment, every bit of his fingertip grew back. > > "Your finger grew back," Andrews asked Spievack, "flesh, blood, vessels and > nail?" > > "Four weeks," he answered. > (...) > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 19:25:48 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:25:48 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Is it real or a hoax (Medicine's Cutting Edge: Re-Growing Organs)? In-Reply-To: <47E8024E.6030603@insightbb.com> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> <030a01c88dd7$e1cbe420$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> <47E8024E.6030603@insightbb.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > Real. Certainly. Fingertips aren't a problem. Sometimes they grow back > with no help at all. It's when you get into the next joint that you run > into problems. > > Brian Wang (futurist) has just posted a 'state-of-the-art' report. (with further reading links). Quote: Researchers now understand in detail the steps that occur when a salamander regenerates a limb and they understand the differences for human scarring and human fetal regeneration or limb growth. The early responses of tissues at an amputation site are not that different in salamanders and in humans, but eventually human tissues form a scar, whereas the salamander's reactivate an embryonic development program to build a new limb. Learning to control the human wound environment to trigger salamanderlike healing could make it possible to regenerate large body parts. A few years to get really good at making mice regenerate and then another ten years to make it happen in humans and get the process approved by regulatory authorities. --------------- BillK From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 24 19:30:53 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:30:53 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." Message-ID: Stathis: >Still, many Maori today consider the colonisers murderers and land >thieves, which undoubtedly some were. >Better not to be colonised. I was born in Honolulu two years after it made Statehood. When I lived in Hawaii in the 60s, the Hawaiian islands were a melting pot that didn't seem to me to be melting very well. A look at the history, indicates some of the reasons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hawaii Today there is still a contingent of Hawaiians who dispute the legality of the Statehood vote and don't appreciate being 'colonized'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_Admission_Act http://www.808talk.com/2007/08/19/808t-e117-hawaii-statehoodillegal/ Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From kuromaku at hush.com Mon Mar 24 20:22:37 2008 From: kuromaku at hush.com (kuromaku at hush.com) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:22:37 +0200 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." Message-ID: <20080324202237.5A18DD01A4@mailserver10.hushmail.com> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:41:48 +0200 Kevin Freels wrote: >> (knowing the infantile >> mentality of most military people), >> >Can you please support this statement ? Well, to the extent I am aware of the situation, if the military people were not infantile, I don't think they would follow orders even when they come from people who have betrayed their country and its constitution, and fought wars against the interests of Americans (yeah, sure those wars must have been worth trillions to your taxpayers.. good thinking military people to do the bidding of your rulers instead of thinking what's good for your country.. bloody mature of you). I'd say they would have overthrown the government and used their guns to make sure politicians wouldn't be allowed to betray the citizens again if they were not infantile. Of course they would also have executed quite a few people after identifying some rational judges. And they would at least start doing something like this right now if they were maturing. Still, I could say I do find most other people infantile whether or not they are in the military or not. That's why I think evolving a bit more (ok, a lot more) as a species (or whatever) is so -- Click for a credit repair consultation, raise your FICO score. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/REAK6ZBOlCTSNkLsro54vcSD1fTvZno3F79HqmdzwrKIfQFRWUHCS6/ important. From jonkc at att.net Mon Mar 24 21:05:54 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:05:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com><200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com><2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com><004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer><2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com><009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004701c88df2$f72d1cb0$19ee4d0c@MyComputer> John Grigg wrote: > John, your humility about your views is > nearly overpowering! Yea, there be some punks out there who is think they is more humble than me but they don't know nothing, they is conceited next to me! I am the king of humble, nobody else even come close! I be the humblest man alive and damn proud of it! > I'm not so sure people and machines > with memes like yours will out-compete > beings with memes like me. I do like > the idea of upgrading/copying/uploading myself Then the uploaded you will realize that he feels just fine and all your previous fears were unjustified. The uploaded you will now have no reason not to engage in pedal to the metal upgrading. After a very very long time, millions perhaps billions of nanoseconds in fact, you will look back at your old meat self and it will be as if you are looking at a flea. Perhaps you will be embarrassed by your primitive self and squash it flat, perhaps you will be amused and treat your old meat self like a pampered pet, there is no way of knowing what the astronomical intelligence you have become will do, not even you can know that even though you are the genesis of that massive super intelligence. > A century from now I will say to you, "this is my > mind family, we are pleased to meet you," and > you will reply with, "I/we are here, greetings. I think you are a nice fellow and in the very unlikely event that I survive the Singularity I'd like to think that the above scenario is how I'd treat the meat being that was once you, but I can't promise it. I really don't know what I'd do if my mind was a million smarter and a billion times faster than it is now. And even if I had nothing but benevolence toward you it would be optimistic to the point of madness to expect that none of the super minds that abound in that period would not consider you a nuisance and a waste of recourses and deal with you accordingly. > The self-circuit has not been permanently > broken when you go under anesthetic and > then regain consciousness. The self circuit, that idiot self circuit that I've heard about for 20 years! You believe in the self circuit, I can only conclude that you agree with Christian Fundamentalists and you do not believe in Darwin's Evolution idea, the single best idea, I believe, any human being has ever had. You said an exact copy of you would not be you, so something must be missing, something must be not so exact after all, it can only be this screwy "self circuit". The "self circuit" coveys no adaptive advantage to the possessor, all it does (and you admitted your copy looks and acts just like you) is generate a sense of self, and if something without a sense of self can look and act just like you then there is no way, absolutely no way, this mythical "self circuit" could have evolved. If the "self circuit" exists then Darwin was wrong, absolutely positively 100% dead wrong. I do not think Darwin was wrong. By the way, do you also think your radio needs a "Beethoven circuit" to play Beethoven? J ohn K Clark From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Mon Mar 24 22:27:20 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:27:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <20080324202237.5A18DD01A4@mailserver10.hushmail.com> References: <20080324202237.5A18DD01A4@mailserver10.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <47E82AC8.1070003@insightbb.com> kuromaku at hush.com wrote: > On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:41:48 +0200 Kevin Freels > wrote: > >>> (knowing the infantile >>> mentality of most military people), >>> >>> >> Can you please support this statement ? >> > > Well, to the extent I am aware of the situation, Research helps. My guess is that you have never been in the military and have known relatively few who have served. I recommend that in the future when you use the SWAG method, don't treat your assumption as common knowledge. > if the military > people were not infantile, I don't think they would follow orders > even when they come from people who have betrayed their country and > its constitution, So in your opinion, following orders in the military is the same as being infantile? No other possibility? Like maybe the majority of the military is made up of rational thinking adult human beings - some very smart - who see their job as one of duty? Maybe they simply don't agree that what they are doing is a betrayal. If you were talking about people blindly following orders and killing and raping innocent human beings like the holocaust, I would agree. But that's not what we're talking about is it? Instead, you have an opinion of what the military should or should not get involved in and since the military is doing something different, you assume that they all must be intellectually inferior to the average human being. ie ; disagreement with you = infantile mentality. Using this logic, I must posses an infantile mind as well. The same goes for anyone else here who has taken an issue with anything you say. So my question is - why do you bother coming here and dealing with our multitude of "infantile mentalities"? > and fought wars against the interests of > Americans (yeah, sure those wars must have been worth trillions to > your taxpayers.. good thinking military people to do the bidding of > your rulers instead of thinking what's good for your country.. > bloody mature of you). The role of the military is not to make the decisions on the large scale goals, only tactical targets to achieve the goals of the commander in chief. This is for a specific reason. If everyone in the military just did whatever they wanted when they wanted with no concept of authority, then we would have total anarchy....NOT an improvement. You need to step outside your little box and see it the way the military sees it...."I may not agree totally, but the president was ELECTED by the people and I am here to do the bidding of the people - not myself". Of course you could never understand the idea of putting yourself in harms way because you are trying to make the world a better place. We can argue all day over whether the decisions to SEND the army are right or wrong, but the chain of command is critical in any military if it is going to actually accomplish anything but killing each other or turn on it's own citizenry. I know a good many brilliant people in the military. Have you considered that they are just in a role that you are incapable of understanding? Of course not. Because you are above that..... > I'd say they would have overthrown the > government and used their guns to make sure politicians wouldn't be > allowed to betray the citizens again if they were not infantile. Of > course they would also have executed quite a few people after > identifying some rational judges. And they would at least start > doing something like this right now if they were maturing. > Sure, a bloodbath coup every time the military decides they don't like the current administration. That's MUCH more mature. The more I read, the more I think you are pulling my leg. What is the "betrayal" you keep referring to? > Still, I could say I do find most other people infantile whether or > not they are in the military or not. That's why I think evolving a > bit more (ok, a lot more) as a species (or whatever) is so important. > I agree we all have a long way to go. But to put yourself on some kind of pedestal and believe that most people are infantile and you are one of the elite few who aren't is kind of silly. I find it amazing that you see yourself this way. You are no less prone to errors in judgment than any other person out there as this post clearly indicates. If you were really such an intellectually superior person you wouldn't spend so much time insulting people and instead look at these things and see what you can learn from them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Mon Mar 24 21:27:58 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:27:58 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant Message-ID: Unbelievably cool.... The more body morphing, the better, for our wild and wonderful future! News from Boing Boing: Transgender man is pregnant http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/24/transgender-man-is-p.html Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From bkdelong at pobox.com Mon Mar 24 21:34:46 2008 From: bkdelong at pobox.com (B.K. DeLong) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:34:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I've been really thinking about this a lot and while I think it's wonderful that this is possible, I wonder how both the body of the carrier and the fetus will be effected by the chemistry of the transgendered body. On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Amara Graps wrote: > Unbelievably cool.... The more body morphing, the better, for our wild > and wonderful future! > > News from Boing Boing: > > Transgender man is pregnant > http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/24/transgender-man-is-p.html > > Amara > > -- > > Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com > Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- B.K. DeLong (K3GRN) bkdelong at pobox.com +1.617.797.8471 http://www.wkdelong.org Son. http://www.ianetsec.com Work. http://www.bostonredcross.org Volunteer. http://www.carolingia.eastkingdom.org Service. http://bkdelong.livejournal.com Play. PGP Fingerprint: 38D4 D4D4 5819 8667 DFD5 A62D AF61 15FF 297D 67FE FOAF: http://foaf.brain-stream.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Mon Mar 24 21:17:24 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:17:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <542200.98270.qm@web27002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Kevin Freels wrote "Everyone likes to bash the US - until they want something. I'd love to see your specific explanation of how the US spreads dictatorship and economic slavery. Can you please give some specific examples?" While I didn't write the original post, as someone living in the UK I can see how much US-bashing there is over here. There's a moderate media industry based on this - under the wikipedia category on US foreign policy, most of the 44 books listed gived detailed explanations of US wrongdoing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Books_about_United_States_foreign_relations In terms of economic slavery, the book "confessions of an economic hit man" claims that big US consulting firms made deliberately inflated plans for development aid to encourage countries to borrow more than they needed - in effect, doing on a national scale what credit card companies try to do to you. When you see pictures of famine-struck countries, and food arriving from the US - that food probably wasn't given away. USAID will have arranged a loan with the nation and then sold them the food at an agreed price, in effect acting as a credit export guarantee company for the US agricultural industry. It helps subsidise US agriculture, but doesn't really aid developing countries. As for spreading dictatorship - it depends on how efficient you believe the CIA is at toppling governments, and whether dictators would have come to the top however the US intervened. The CIA did attempt to remove Salvador Allende of Chile, but the Chilean military could well have had the idea to execute the democratically elected leader by themselves. The Shah of Iran and the Saudi Royal family are absolute monarchs who've been on the receiving end of US aid - one fell to revolution, one is still with us. The US involvement here has cost a lot of money and lives, but has bought a degree of oil security. A lot of the US-bashing comes from either people attacking the biggest targets first (so major powers like the US and China will be treated more harshly than whether or not the Swiss banking system helps african dictators launder money, or whether Yemen's human rights violations are horrific), or general envy of the US's success. Don't worry - this year's Olympics will get the world media concentrating on Beijing's mistakes, and the US election gives pro-Americans the chance to persuade people there'll be change. If current economic projections are vaguely correct, come 2040 everyone will be moaning about them damn Chinese and by 2060 it'll be those stupid voters in Delhi voting someone more unpopular than George Bush. Tom __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. More Ways to Keep in Touch. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 24 21:44:55 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:44:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief?. In-Reply-To: <004701c88df2$f72d1cb0$19ee4d0c@MyComputer> References: <2d6187670803220839o2879d77fi5c7b13eb7f12fc5c@mail.gmail.com> <200803222056.m2MKu5du010565@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670803230754s624f55bfn108e6bbb425f10c@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88d0b$ee04ae60$59ef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803231200ie20607au4fdb0b4eb280b9f5@mail.gmail.com> <009501c88dc7$f0ace490$ddef4d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803241028v7a949b3di35c55af385ef3411@mail.gmail.com> <004701c88df2$f72d1cb0$19ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080324164147.0239a648@satx.rr.com> At 05:05 PM 3/24/2008 -0400, John K Clark wrote: >By the way, do you also think your radio needs a "Beethoven circuit" >to play Beethoven? It would to *generate* Beethoven. Don't you think your computer needs a "John K Clark" circuit to produce your emails? Damien Broderick From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Mon Mar 24 21:43:36 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:43:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] stolen generations. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <788422.17440.qm@web27007.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 3:25 PM, hkhenson wrote: > I don't think there are any such groups left. > The big problem is to avoid it happening to us. I checked t'internet to see how much this is happening - http://www.survival-international.org/home is the website of a charity campaigning for indigenous people. One of their links is entitled "Progress can kill". They also have a video on uncontacted tribes that is interesting. When you see their list of campaigns, it's clear that there's a lot of pressure on tribal peoples around the world. Tom __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. More Ways to Keep in Touch. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Mar 24 22:14:47 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> Message-ID: <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- hkhenson wrote: > As some of you know, I have been working on a pre singularity > solution to the energy problems (power sats). Unfortunately, my > efforts are not likely to accomplish much. Is there is some reason other than fear-based politics that we cannot further increase our reliance on nuclear energy until we can get power sats online? If I remember your detailed series of posts on the topics, the largest piece of unobtainium that made your proposal impractical was the space elevator, the design of which took up the majority of your description. Can you give some details regarding the actual power sats themselves. More specifically things like mass, materials, costs, number, etc. If you make these power sats contigent on a space elevator, then we probably are screwed. But if we can at least some power sats into orbit, it may help us bootstrap a space elevator later. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Mon Mar 24 22:53:02 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Spring Time on Neptune- WTF? Message-ID: <949794.31385.qm@web65407.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Amara, tell me I am crazy for thinking that those green bands around Neptune's southern pole might be some bizarre extremophillic algal or cyanobacterial bloom? http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/display.cfm?IM_ID=2565 I mean its got water, ammonia, methane, and down far enough it even has heat. Might there not be a layer where the temperature and pressure are sufficiently balanced to allow liquid water to form? What is there in the atmosphere that might be green? And why is Neptune bluer than Uranus? Could it be a liquid water phase? There is even a methane green house gas effect occuring in the southern hemisphere according to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptune Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From citta437 at aol.com Mon Mar 24 23:28:14 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:28:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death Message-ID: <8CA5C1DDDAE0A58-1478-19FF@webmail-ne21.sysops.aol.com> "Terry writes >> > Thoughts and feelings similar to fear of death >> > arise from narcissistic desire for immortality >> > that evolved in the genetic evolution of the >> > human species. Lee: "Later on, by the way, it becomes less clear what you mean by "narcissistic". It's usually used somewhat pejoratively in English. Naturally, I do *not* at all consider desires for living in the far future---even if that were to mean living so long as the universe does---as "narcissistic", unless one would consider any life extension or even any increase in personal standard of living to be so. And then one would be guilty of using the words in a very non-standard way. > > > I don't know how old you are, but let X = Terry's age. Then > > Then would you call your desire to continue to live well past the > > age X *narcissistic*? My reply> Desires to live well past whatever age is a genetic predisposition/ > narcissistic/ego causing dissatisfaction/duality, mental conflict/distress. Lee: "Pardon my French, but that really sounds like a lot of BS. It sounds as though you are evading the question. Do you or do you not approve of people trying to keep on living? If so, why call it narcissism? Do you or do you not approve of people seeking immortality for themselves and those they love, or, indeed, for everyone? Would you call that "narcissistic"? (You did before.) _______________ My reply: Re-read well the above where i wrote desires are genetic predisposition, the predisposition to be narcissistic or egoistic. It is none of my business to approve or not what people do to keep on living. Desires by itself are normal when self-love becomes an obsession to the point of narcissism, it caused suffering on the individual and those who are affected negatively by inducing envy or other passionate feelings, specifically, suicide bombers seeking immortality. > [Lee again] > > Because I want to keep on living---forget immortality (let's > > say that all matter is due to disintegrate in a few trillion years) > > ---why does that make me narcissistic? Or does it? >______________ My reply: The goal to keep on living for what? If the goal to keep on living for the sake of self-gratification is narcissism. > Want/desire cause suffering because of misperceptions/ > assumptions of reality. Genes are the blue prints of DNA. This is a > fact not an assumption with existing evidence which can > be tested by the scientific method. Lee: "You wax from the banal "genes are the blue prints of DNA" to the zen-like crap of "wants cause suffering because of [bad] assumptions about reality", which really is a load. What a preposterous statement. Because, say, an animal wants to get a drink of water, or (if it's a chimp, say, to settle an old score with a rival), this necessarily causes suffering because of "misperceptions/assumptions" of reality? Please." My reply: I did not say bad, you inserted the word {bad] assumptions about reality. Assumptions are mistakes in thinking. The word bad implies a value judgement based on your perceptions. In connection with cryogenics, they may think their goal is noble to live in the future happily ever after is a belief not unlike any religious belief. I respect your belief so long it does not become an obsession/fanatical to the point of creating more chaos/suffering to yourself and those others affected in a way wherein people become blind to reality in order to obtain their desire at all cost. Lee: > > "Those in the EEA who didn't fear death often did not leave behind > > as many viable offspring. That's why. Clear enough?" > > No, what is EEA? Lee: Sorry. It's the Environment of Evolutionary Adaptedness, supposed to be ~1.8 million B.C. to 200,000 B.C., or something like that. The interval where we got most of our built-in instincts and traits which make us human. It's the interval that the EP folks are always focusing on. So my statement is just what you were saying already, but just in different language, I suspect. > Lee: > > Speaking very precisely, and not in the usual manner, it's > > not death at all that I'm afraid of. I merely regret not getting > > to go on living. Do you have a problem with that?" > > My reply: There is cellular death and the deaths of thoughts as in > trauma, dementia and there are those so called living dead who are > comatose, asleep or during general anesthesia. The problem is when you > failed to wake up during general anesthesia, stayed comatose till all > neurons and body system all declined or become irreversible. Lee: "You seem to have evaded my question. I will *certainly* agree that it is a BIG problem if you fail to wake up after general anesthesia, but that's because it means you die. Me, I have problem with that. What criticisms do you have, again, for those who want to keep on living, forever if possible? (Here "criticism" is positive analysis and probing, as used in Pan Critical Rationalism, PCR.) So it's narcissistic? Well, what isn't? > Humans share about 98% DNA with other primates > according to the recent study/findings of the scientific > method of investigation. The other 2% {a well -developed > cortex} makes all the difference between humans and > the apes. A well-developed brain in humans have the > potentiality to reason, to use technological advancement > and a language/scientific method to investigate beliefs of > reality, thoughts and memes. Yes. That's actually pretty old hat, but yes, I agree. This is the sort of level of knowledge that you should assume that the readers here already know quite well. > Lee: > > And reason tells me that if my life is worth living > > for a certain (future) interval Y - X, then I would > > rather be alive than dead during that interval. Is > > there a particular reason that you don't want to > > be alive during the interval 2350 A.D. - 2650 A.D.?" > > My reply: Who doesn't? Lots of religious people would rather be dead by then. Lots of other people, e.g. Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke had other rationalizations (very clever ones, of course) for prefering non-existence. > Of course, I want to be alive with all my faculties for > thinking and feeling intact. Lee: "I'm glad to hear that! Even in the far future, I take it? Does this mean that you are an opponent of dying?" I said in my previews post "Nobody dies". If you mean by dying as the irreversible loss of consciousness per se, no. > Time does not exist permanently. Lee: "That is the sort of statement that should seriously, seriously, be deleted upon a re-reading just before you click on "send". What on Earth are your poor readers to think of such a claim??? Have mercy." My reply: Time exist as a thought so which time /thought is true? > Feelings and thoughts change in time. Lee: "Back to the banal." > We are thoughts/feelings changing all the time. IF you > cling to time past and future, you suffer for fear of > losing a memory, a thought as well as a feeling of security. Lee: "True enough. Do you happen to cling to time (past and future) in such a way that you, Terry, also suffer for fear of losing your, say, memories? Or have you evolved beyond that? I can't tell from your words. Sometimes you just drop these platitudes without taking any kind of personal stand, so that the reader is perplexed. " My reply: I have no fear of losing some thoughts and memories specially when I need to be aware of what is happening around the world and my own community. Lee: "In other words, do you approve or not of people being afraid of losing memory? My reply: I neither fear nor approve the loss of memories because today we have the means to delay the process. > Terry {sometimes secure and insecure} :-} Lee: :-) Aren't we all! ----- From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 24 23:29:12 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 00:29:12 +0100 Subject: [ExI] A few thoughts on races [was: Re: Race Biology] Message-ID: <580930c20803241629k59f26bb0qc322c6a2416e1b79@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > By "properly" I assume you mean "reliably" or "replicably" rather > than "appropriately." The distinction is important. What canon of > criteria, independent-of-human-history, does the automaton use to > select the major traits it uses to characterize individuals into 3, > 30 or 300 "human races"? - The answer is: *any* criterium. According to Dobzhansky, a race was "the abstraction of the identifying features of secondary Mendelian populations within the same species". I think this is still a good definition. - The study and discussion of racial biology in general is best performed, whenever possible, with regard to species other than Homo sapiens, where much less emotional baggage and ideological or personal bias in one sense or another are involved. - Are "races" a cultural construct? Sure. As are species and phyla for that matter, and taxonomy in general. "The mammals" do not exist, there is only a number of organisms (with all necessary caveats regarding the concept itself of "organism") that I may find comfortable to classify under this label for one purpose or another, "the bipeds" or "the predators" being sometimes more relevant and practical sets. What else is new? Moreover, with regard to human races, this is true in a few more senses, namely that on one hand what has produced racial differenciation in the past (drift, segregation, oriented selection) has had much to do for our species with cultural differentiation, which in turn depends only partially on environmental or "natural" differences; and on the other what is popularly meant by "race" in the US seems to have more to do with tribal affiliations than with any anthropological concept (see the phenomenon already noted in the list, and by Dawkins in *The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution*, where recent African ancestry seems memetically to be a dominant trait, an Europoid ancestry a recessive trait). - Unless one loves entropy, biodiversity is good per se, and the idea of objectively "superior" races or racial traits implies a universal scale of values the foundation of which ultimately can only be metaphysical and at odd with any evolutionary prospective. Genetic differences and genetic variance should be protected, if not deliberately developed along multiple and possibly diverging lines, rather than reduced in view of some elusive "optimality" or Platonic fixist ideas. Unfortunately, while this may appear obvious to many of us, monoculturalism and globalisation need not be officially "racist" to risk to lead us in the opposite direction at many levels. Transhumanism and technology remain however the best bet IMHO against such a diversity loss. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 00:01:14 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:01:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <294501c88d23$0cdde6a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323163649.02797220@satx.rr.com> <1206311229_3581@S4.cableone.net> <29666bf30803232038u36a5b1cp9714a79f3fc25fa3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803241701y2d52f3beudf3892b4f28ce9d9@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 4:38 AM, PJ Manney wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 3:25 PM, hkhenson wrote: > > I don't think there are any such groups left. > > The big problem is to avoid it happening to us. > > The key is empathy. When I read about the stolen generations, all I > could think of was what it would be like to be the mother of a child, > or the child herself, literally ripped from their mother's arms by > armed men, never to see their family again. I can guarantee that > those who implemented the policy couldn't have imagined nor cared less > what the Aborigines were thinking or feeling, because they were not > regarded as fully human and therefore not capable of the same thoughts > and feelings. The few in power who did empathize at the time were the > few who protested the policy. > Mmhhh. I wonder if is enough. That is, not just for "feeling good" or propaganda purposes, but for things to go any differently. As far as cultural genocide is concerned, the hell is very typically paved with good intentions. "Salvation" from one's community, customs, "barbarian" ways-of-life, perceived inferior ethical or political standards, etc., since we obviously "know what is best for them", is one. See for the best ever fictionalised analysis of this mechanism M. Resnick's Inferno. A Chronicle of a Distant World, Tor Books, 1995, ISBN 0812523458. Cultures, races, populations, nations are born, grow, evolve, cross-pollinate, split, segregate, merge, sometimes decline and die. But to kill them "for their own good" always seemed to me the supreme insult and irony. Whenever one goes down the road of "it is better to spare the people [actually, the individual] than to spare their culture", neither usually end up having been spared. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 00:45:15 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:45:15 -0600 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: <022c01c88d0e$674edfa0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <2d6187670803231018v4c15daf2lc505a3a2bb0a9e71@mail.gmail.com> <022c01c88d0e$674edfa0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Gary Miller wrote: > Jeff you sound rather committed to the establishment of a new world order. > > With that level of commitment and many of the countries in the world > teetering much closer to the brink than the the United States to revolution > and overthrow I wonder why you are not taking advantage of the nearer > opportunities and establishing your new world order there. Someone has said that humans are inherently political creatures. I agree, but don't feel good about that, particularly for me as a personal matter. I -- whoops! -- gave in to that human impulse and posted what in hindsight I see as flamebait (impotent, masturbatory, political mouth-flapping. A pathetic waste of time.) Sorry. I apologise to everyone. More and more I try to remind myself that the way of progress, the way to the "extropian" (ie dynamically optimistic) future, is through public sector entrepreneurialism. Nation states and their political elites are the legacy plague of power-addicted ego-paths. So I'm trying to concentrate on those things which impact me personally, lie within my personal sphere, and on which I can have some genuine impact. But it's still hard to divert my gaze from the ever-entertaining television-delivered drama of the rich and powerful. So, put me down as someone pursuing a New Personal Order. For the world...well...if you'll forgive an attempt at cleverness, then put me down as one in favor of a New World Disorder: fewer bombs and goose stepping, and more doing one's own thing and minding one's own business. > Should you succeed in establishing a utopian society where many others have > failed I am sure that as other countries become disillusioned with their > current forms of government they will choose to model their new societies > after yours. > > Just out of curiousity what country or countries in the world today are > closest to your ideas of a utopian government and how do they still differ > from your ideal? I don't really think you're sincere in your question, but I'm in a particularly calm mood so I'll answer. Oddly, I find myself living in Canada in summer and Mexico in winter these days. And the cultural differences are interesting (though I wouldn't dream of calling either of these ideal or utopian). The Canada I have found is a lovely sort of gentle benign place without goose-stepping or pretensions to such. It leaves me feeling that my life belongs to me and not some amped-up world crusade. And Mexico -- Baja at least -- is so seemingly devoid of bureaucratic intrusion (I'm probably just projecting my wishes onto my lack of experience) that again I feel like my life belongs to me. For example I can take my dogs almost anywhere and no one complains -- unless they misbehave, which they haven't yet. And anyone can smoke just about anywhere (I don't, but I could) and no one says boo, unless the smoke is going right in their face, in which case the necessary adjustments are made -- and politely. That's another thing I like about Mexican culture (speaking as one who knows absolutely nothing about it). The folks here seem to insist of being polite. When they have a problem with you, they don't get up in your face, but rather, they cleverly find a polite, deliberately respectful way of addressing the issue. Very impressive. Anyway, these experiences are making me rethink some cultural habits and what I might have once thought of as a "utopian" society. When I'm through mulling it over I'll maybe get back to you. Till then I wish you luck in your endeavors, cause basically I suspect we're all after much the same thing: a better arrangement in a still imperfect world. Whoops! gotta go. Time for my next dose of soma. No time for a spell check, you're on your own. Best, Jeff Davis I know it is a weakness of human nature to become emotionally invested in inconsequential tribal spats, but people who want to be transhumanists need to be able to get past that almost as a prerequisite. In fact, a good portion of the transhumanist ideals are all about shedding this behavior. j. andrew rogers From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 25 00:51:47 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:51:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803250054.m2P0rp2h011815@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: Re: [ExI] META: Overposting ... > > > > http://heybryan.org/stats/2008-03-23-extropy-chat.html > > > > People who have written most messages: Author > Msg Percent > > 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % > > > Quick! Call the moderator! > > Oh-oh. He *is* the moderator. ;) > ... > BillK BillK! I demand a discount, since some of my posts were posts scolding you guys for overposting! Those shouldn't count. Since I am only two posts ahead of Lee (well, OK, three now) I have made at least (I think) three or four posts about overposting, then that puts him in the seat of dishonor. {8-] You see why I so seldom post about overposting. What really gets my goat as a moderator is those who post stuff that shows they don't understand the Extropian principles. I suggest everyone who posts here check that out if you haven't already. http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm If one posts smart stuff, entertaining, cool, significant, interesting, etc, no one will complain over a few extras. If otherwise, they will start complaining before you hit the big numbers, as has happened recently. So do post smart stuff, thanks. spike From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 25 00:44:19 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:44:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803250113.m2P1D3En005432@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK > Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:35 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] META: Overposting > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > On Sunday 23 March 2008, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > > Please be careful not to over-post on this list. (If you are not > > sure > if you are overposting, please see how many times > your name is > > > appearing in relation to other posts :-)) > > > > http://heybryan.org/stats/2008-03-23-extropy-chat.html > > > > People who have written most messages: Author > Msg Percent > > 1 spike66 at att.net 348 6.64 % > > > Quick! Call the moderator! > > Oh-oh. He *is* the moderator. ;) > > > > > Huh. Guess I have to trim it down a bit. > > - Bryan > > > Not necessarily. The reference is to the 'EXTROPY-CHAT LIST > GUIDELINES'. > Here: > > Quote: > Given the number of subscribers to the Extropy-Chat mailing > list, we strongly recommend that you restrain yourself to a > MAXIMUM of eight posts per day. Those who exceed the eight > posts per day limit will receive a private warning. Repeat > offenders will be subject to other measures such as temporary > or permanent bans from the list. > ---------------- > > Posting too much is not measured against annual totals or > length of messages (though people will complain about > over-long messages and probably skip over most of the content). > > It is just that sometimes people get caught up in the > enthusiasm of the discussion and get into treating the list > like an instant messaging system or a phone call. I believe, > that to help raise list quality, posts are supposed to be > written after some consideration, not fired off in machine gun style. > > Personally I write many furious tirades totally demolishing > every post that I have the slightest disagreement with. I am > a legend in my own living-room. > Luckily I have covered my delete key with a sticker saying 'POST NOW!' > > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Tue Mar 25 01:15:20 2008 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:15:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race? In-Reply-To: <709278.1302.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <72696.36515.qm@web30406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> >I don't consider autism to be a "flaw" any more than >I consider, say, being female to be a "flaw". I most >certainly do NOT "limit myself" or "determine >myself" in totality by it. In fact, I find such a >suggestion extremely smarmy and ignorant. My sincere apology Anne, after re-reading what I wrote I realized it does sound rather rude and unjust. It comes off wrong sometimes when I write the translation from french to english. What I meant by flaw was not you being autistic, it was that I find you limit yourself by putting an emphasis on the fact that you are autistic. >It is not up to anyone else to decide on my behalf >whether or not I am "limiting myself". Absolutely right, my apology again. >You have to understand that when I use "labels" I am >not using them in a manner as a person might who >*wanted* to "define herself" totally by them. All >they are is useful short-hand for constellations of >tendencies and/or traits. I have plenty of actual >flaws (as all humans do) -- I just don't consider >the low-level perceptual/cognitive attributes that >have been identified as "autistic" to indicate >intrinsic broken-ness. I agree with you but the fact is that people do label. It's rather normal form of memorization. For example, I remember the name John K.Clark and associate him with the label "Mr. Rude Man":) I am always labelled as the red head with curly hair. All I meant is that when people associate you, they associate with the label autistic. >You have revealed a bias that I think many people >should actually be more aware of, which is to say >that you seem to assume right off that something is >a "flaw" just because social norms currently >identify it as such. I don't consider autism a flaw as much as I don't consider me having red hair a flaw, it's just a label. The unfortunate truth is that many uneducated people consider it a flaw. (At one point having red hair could have gotten you killed). My point which I clearly did not get through is that I find your writing and ideas great and find your postings educational but I was just commenting that I wouldn't want you just to be labelled simply Anne Corwin, the autistic. Many will read what you write and don't know you, it would be a shame if they only recognized you as such label. Then again, I shouldn't even have posted my reply as really it is none of my business and am truly sorry if I offended you, it really isn't my style. >I would LOVE certain kinds of "modifications" >and/or "upgrades". I am all for extending the >healthy lifespan, for instance, and I think it would >be pretty neat to, say, be able to see more >wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. I am >all for making myself, if it were possible, >resistant to cancer and other actual diseases. I am >all for allowing OTHER people who might be autistic >or whatever to decide that they want to change those >things. Me too. >Additionally, I am ALWAYS working to improve skills >and learn new things, to become adept with new >tools, to work on picking up at least small bits of >other languages, etc. If I wanted to limit myself, >why would I be doing that? Please do not tell me I >am limiting myself *merely* by saying I don't think >I need to be nonautistic in order to be happy and/or >successful. That is seriously one of my major pet >peeves and it's also a generally destructive >attitude I see coming from far too many people whom >I'd think should know better. No, I would never say such a thing, again this is my fault because I really wasn't clear when I wrote the first post. My apology to the list. Anna __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 25 02:04:39 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:04:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803250207.m2P26gaP025846@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of BillK ... > to uplift the children at least, to give them the opportunity > to join posthuman society? > > I expect the people in this list will be clamouring at the > door 'Me first! Me first!', but less knowledgeable people > might be very reluctant to leave their old ways behind. We > can say now that they have their right to choose and should > be left alone, and other PC platitudes, but think about it... BillK BillK, this observation brings up a number of interesting questions about the stolen aboriginal children. Were there a few eager volunteers in the bunch? Perhaps there were hungry young parents who looked at what the Europeans had, then compared to what they themselves had, then sadly realized their baby would have a better life with the others. Were there borderline cases, where they were unsure but wanted to step out? Were there hip aboriginal teenagers Me firsting to get into European Australian world? Were there aboriginal geeks, low ranking and mistreated regularly by their peers, who longed to go outside that system and try their luck elsewhere? Child gang-rape victims that had an anywhere-but-here attitude? Homesick returners to the old ways after a short time with the others? Reluctant in-betweens who found themselves lost in both worlds? Opportunistic in-betweens who were at home in both worlds? Business minded ones who set up businesses buying low cost manufactured goods from their aboriginal family, and sold them for holy profits to their European family? I can imagine all of these. Damien might have some insights on this. spike From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 25 02:17:48 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:17:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] robodog Message-ID: <200803250220.m2P2Jp0k027155@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Kewall, check this! Comes with its own evil growl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww Notice in the ice scene. Doesn't that remind you of a big dog slipping around on an icy sidewalk? Does this give you new insight on biological systems? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com Tue Mar 25 02:48:35 2008 From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Tech Awards Nomination Deadline Extended to April 7 In-Reply-To: <2B8CC8EC59544E808D18838BB81029B9@JerryPC> Message-ID: <201879.36963.qm@web65105.mail.ac2.yahoo.com> Dear friends, Anyone can nominate anyone else:-) This is an excellent opportunity for all your futuristic ideas! Good luck, hard work and success... Futuristically yours, La vie est belle! Jose Cordeiro (www.cordeiro.org) Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Developing Economies, IDE - JETRO (www.ide.go.jp) Founder, Sociedad Mundial del Futuro Venezuela (www.FuturoVenezuela.org) Chair, Venezuela, The Millennium Project (www.millennium-project.org) Academic Committee, CEDICE, Venezuela (www.cedice.org.ve) Tech Museum Awarding $250,000 in Cash Prizes Global Call For Nominations of Innovators Using Technology to Benefit Humanity Nomination Deadline Extended to April 7, 2008 www.techawards.org Call for Nominations Video The Tech Museum Awards is a unique and prestigious program that honors and awards innovators from around the world who use technology to benefit humanity in the categories of: Education Equality Economic Development Environment Health Reward those making a difference and nominate today. A simple nomination form can be found at www.techawards.org. Self-nominations are accepted and encouraged. Individuals, nonprofit organizations, and companies are all eligible. Program details, including judging criteria, can be found at The Tech Museum Awards website listed above. Each year, 25 Laureates are honored at a gala dinner, invited to participate in press and media coverage, and introduced to a network of influential advisors. An inspirational and unforgettable event, the black-tie celebration will be held at the San Jose McEnery Convention Center in San Jose, California, on November 12, 2008. One Laureate in each category will be granted a $50,000 cash prize. Gillian Caldwell of WITNESS, 2003 Laureate in the Equality category and cash prize recipient, called The Tech Museum Awards"...a truly remarkable program that has given WITNESS acclaim for using technology to document human rights abuses. I was deeply honored to be recognized along with 24 other innovators from around the world who are working to improve human life through technology. The exposure generated from receiving this award and the $50,000 cash prize will surely lead to expanded services, awareness, and improved solutions for ending violations of human rights." We encourage you to forward this email to any contacts you have that may be interested in nominating a candidate for this award. Thank you for your support. Tech Awards Partners & Sponsors PRESENTING SPONSOR IN ASSOCIATION WITH GLOBAL OUTREACH PARTNERS AWARD SPONSORS ENVIRONMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION EQUALITY HEALTH GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN This CoolerEmail was delivered to you by The Tech Museum Awards. You can take your email address off The Tech Museum Awards' email list, or update your preferences and/or send comments to The Tech Museum Awards. If you request to be taken off The Tech Museum Awards' email list, The Tech Museum Awards will honor your request pursuant to CoolerEmail's permission-based email terms and conditions. Postal address: 249 Highway 101, Suite 525, Solana Beach, CA 92075 Powered by CoolerEmail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From artillo at comcast.net Tue Mar 25 03:18:31 2008 From: artillo at comcast.net (artillo at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 03:18:31 +0000 Subject: [ExI] robodog Message-ID: <032520080318.5313.47E86F0700040507000014C12207000953010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> WOW that's pretty amazing maneuverability! The ice scene was awesome; it looked like how a deer slips and recovers to me. Imagine a swarm of those things coming over a hill, that eerie buzzing multiplied 100 fold might be enough to send some enemies running without even firing a shot. Asimo finally has a mount he can ride into "battle" with? -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "spike" > Kewall, check this! Comes with its own evil growl: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww > > > > Notice in the ice scene. Doesn't that remind you of a big dog slipping > around on an icy sidewalk? Does this give you new insight on biological > systems? > > > > spike > -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "spike" Subject: [ExI] robodog Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 02:20:44 +0000 Size: 4824 URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 25 04:02:02 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:02:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Spring Time on Neptune- WTF? In-Reply-To: <949794.31385.qm@web65407.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <170842.96923.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- The Avantguardian wrote: Compare the pictures. > http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/display.cfm?IM_ID=2565 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Coccolithophore_bloom.jpg Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 04:01:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:01:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us><00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stathis writes > Dagon Gmail wrote: > >> So when murrca is magically reduced to a wasteland of fine ashy >> powder and all people, buildings, roads, everything in it is away to >> oblivion, suddenly the world will be overrun by dictators? I never heard anyone make such a claim, neither here nor anywhere. But don't you think that the Japanese and the people around China's southern borders might be just a tad more apprehensive about China than they are now? >> Laughable, delusional. I am personally convinced of precisely the >> opposite. The institute of the US is an exploitative device that >> SPREADS dictatorship, economic slavery and war as a >> typhoid Mary spreads infection. > > I wouldn't go that far, there have been worse imperial powers. Well then, just how would you characterize Dagon's mindset, Stathis? > But it's important to ask, why do so many people around the world feel > this way, even those in wealthy countries not adversely affected by > decisions in Washington? Meanwhile, then, I'll take a swing at such a characterization(s) and try to take a first pass at your excellent question. Hatred of "murrca" has a number of sources. We can dispense with a a few of the simplest right away. Some people hate the United States for specific actions it has taken. Some survivors of Hiroshima or Tokyo (1945 March 9,10) still hate the entity that destroyed their property and killed their loved ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo_in_World_War_II Others in this same camp may hate America for no better reason than that their immigration request was denied. It happens. Beyond such personal grievances (which are totally irrelevant) are more serious ones. Some people hate America because they theorize that the world would be a much better and safer place if it had suddenly ceased to exist around 1960, say. By now the world economy would have recovered, and without that particular evil aggressive nation, the rest of the world would be relatively at peace: no Vietnams, no Iraqs, etc. The powers remaining, the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China may not be perfect, but they would no threat to their neighbors the way that the evil murrca is to all nations, not only of their own continent and their own hemisphere, but to all other nations of the globe period. I consider that view (Noam Chomsky's view, if I'm not mistaken) to be merely delusional. But it can slide imperceptibly towards: Much more serious---and the whole point---is the hatred or at least rather bitter resentment felt by many around the world that at first blush appears focused on annoyance at America's foreign policy, or upon its economic "domination", or upon its "arrogance". It is these three last things that must be discussed, but I'm out of time at the moment. Lee From amara at amara.com Tue Mar 25 04:49:05 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:49:05 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Spring Time on Neptune- WTF? Message-ID: Stuart: You'll need to dig up the color table for those images (suggestion: go to the 2003 Icarus paper to which that the PR refers. Planetary data is usually spectrally coded, so that green represents a wavelength region. I doubt that green corresponds to what you are accustomed to seeing in visual wavelengths. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 08:09:58 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:09:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death References: <8CA5C1DDDAE0A58-1478-19FF@webmail-ne21.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <672f01c88e4f$f848cba0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Terry writes >>> Of course, I want to be alive with all my faculties for >>> thinking and feeling intact. > > > > Lee: "I'm glad to hear that! Even in the far future, I take it? > > Does this mean that you are an opponent of dying?" > > I said in my previews post "Nobody dies". If you mean by dying as the > irreversible loss of consciousness per se, no. Nobody dies? You are quite serious? Surely you believe that a bandit with a gun can kill you. Wouldn't you find that at least inconvenient? In your way of using words, how should the 30,000,000 who're no longer with us since the Great Leap Forward be described? Not as dead? > > > Time does not exist permanently. > > > Lee: > > "That is the sort of statement that should seriously, seriously, > > be deleted upon a re-reading just before you click on "send". > > What on Earth are your poor readers to think of such a claim??? > > Have mercy." > > My reply: Time exist as a thought so which time /thought is true? Your reply is yet another question. Been hitting the Zen bottle, eh? But your "Time does not exist permanently" is seriously funny! You ought to consider putting that on your tombstone! Is there a passerby whose grave aspect would not at least for a moment be lightened by such? W.C. Fields move over. Lee From stathisp at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 10:17:46 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:17:46 +1100 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On 25/03/2008, Lee Corbin wrote: > Beyond such personal grievances (which are totally irrelevant) are > more serious ones. Some people hate America because they theorize > that the world would be a much better and safer place if it had > suddenly ceased to exist around 1960, say. By now the world > economy would have recovered, and without that particular evil > aggressive nation, the rest of the world would be relatively at > peace: no Vietnams, no Iraqs, etc. The powers remaining, the > Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China may not be > perfect, but they would no threat to their neighbors the way that > the evil murrca is to all nations, not only of their own continent and > their own hemisphere, but to all other nations of the globe period. > > I consider that view (Noam Chomsky's view, if I'm not mistaken) > to be merely delusional. But it can slide imperceptibly towards: > > Much more serious---and the whole point---is the hatred or at least > rather bitter resentment felt by many around the world that at first > blush appears focused on annoyance at America's foreign policy, > or upon its economic "domination", or upon its "arrogance". Contrast the world's attitude towards America with the world's attitude towards the EU: just as rich (indeed, richer if GDP is the measure of wealth, and the Euro may overtake the dollar as the world's reserve currency), just as culturally dominant (even if you only consider the extent to which American culture is transplanted European culture), just as arrogant (ask a Frenchman or a Greek about the significance of his country in the history of the world). And yet, resentment of European countries around the world is often in proportion to how easily those countries can be lumped together with America, culturally or in the degree to which they support American foreign policy decisions. -- Stathis Papaioannou From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 25 12:18:06 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:18:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Self circuit as memory Message-ID: <8CA5C896A3C4852-EAC-5311@webmail-nf12.sim.aol.com> " The self-circuit has not been permanently > broken when you go under anesthetic and > then regain consciousness. You said an exact copy of you would not be you, so something must be missing, something must be not so exact after all, it can only be this screwy "self circuit". The "self circuit" coveys no adaptive advantage to the possessor, all it does (and you admitted your copy looks and acts just like you) is generate a sense of self, and if something without a sense of self can look and act just like you then there is no way, absolutely no way, this mythical "self circuit" could have evolved. If the "self circuit" exists then Darwin was wrong, absolutely positively 100% dead wrong. I do not think Darwin was wrong. By the way, do you also think your radio needs a "Beethoven circuit" to play Beethoven? J ohn K Clark _______________ If I may step in to reply, self circuit maybe a technological term for memory. Some who are not so technologically aware may think it is a ghost in the machine or a soul. Some memories remain intact when you regain consciousness from anesthesia depends on how successful the procedure is. Even in the normal processes of living a healthy life there are some wear and tear of cellular system such as the skin which shed a lot of dead cells and new cells regenerate. Some recent scientific discoveries on cellular function found that our cells have a mechanical type of memories such as the organ system of digestion. You need not tell your stomach to digest food, it automatically does it. The sense system of self/mind is a product of genes the same way as memories. Some memories die and some come back depends on how we use the brain matter. A recording or copy of the original is a copy not the original/ singularity. The invention of the wheel contributed to several copies today. Terry From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 12:36:27 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 09:36:27 -0300 Subject: [ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C." References: <20080324202237.5A18DD01A4@mailserver10.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <00b901c88e74$d9dcdce0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> kuromaku> I'd say they would have overthrown the > government and used their guns to make sure politicians wouldn't be > allowed to betray the citizens again if they were not infantile. This happened here in Brasil in 1964 and lasted until 1985... and also across all hispanoamerica around the same period. I would NOT recommend the experience to anyone. I'd say *some* military procedures and behaviours (your shoes are not shiny enough, now drop down and give me twenty) are indeed infantile, but don't take some idiosyncratic parts for the whole. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 14:18:30 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 07:18:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 3:14 PM, The Avantguardian wrote: > --- hkhenson wrote: > > > As some of you know, I have been working on a pre singularity > > solution to the energy problems (power sats). Unfortunately, my > > efforts are not likely to accomplish much. > > Is there is some reason other than fear-based politics that we cannot > further increase our reliance on nuclear energy until we can get power > sats online? How about fear based reality? http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/10/30/18253/301 The problem is that the US scattered DU around the mid east without a thought that you can make high grade plutonium out of it in any reactor. > If I remember your detailed series of posts on the topics, > the largest piece of unobtainium that made your proposal impractical > was the space elevator, the design of which took up the majority of > your description. Can you give some details regarding the actual power > sats themselves. More specifically things like mass, materials, costs, > number, etc. There were a number of detailed studies of power sats back in the late 70s. The mass number currently on Wikipedia is 2kg/kW. Anything less than 3kg/kW pays back the energy need to lift it to GEO in a day or less using mechanical power. As to cost, the are currently utterly dominated by the cost of lift to GEO by rockets. As to number, if you want to put a dent in the energy problem, it's in the range of 300 GW/year installed. At 5 GW each, that's 60 of them, or 600,000 tons per year to GEO. The unobtainium part of the space elevator is the cable. There are persistent rumors that the University of Cambridge has demonstrated 20 GPa nanotube yarn, the report has been expected to be published in science for a few months, but nothing has happened. Even 20 GPa isn't strong enough, but it's getting there. > If you make these power sats contigent on a space elevator, then we > probably are screwed. But if we can at least some power sats into > orbit, it may help us bootstrap a space elevator later. > If we can set up a 600,000 ton per year pipeline into space with rockets or laser launchers, that's probably the way to go. You have to dedicate the first 15-20 power sats to powering the lasers or making rocket fuel, but after they are in place, the project is a net generator of energy at a high enough rate to replace coal and oil. If you wonder why an old L5 guy does not promote extra terrestrial materials, it's because of time. The singularity will come before space industry to process them can be set up. Keith From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 25 14:38:38 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:38:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] What Monitors the Singularity? Message-ID: <8CA5C9D0C820BCB-1254-2BB@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Correct me if I'm wrong ,according to the Institute of Artificial Intelligence, superintelligence is a self-monitoring device. Evolution is too slow at the rate it takes for human intelligence to evolve from the apes to where it is now. So with the aid of nanotechnology we can speed up the growth of human intelligence. Agreed. All of us have a potential to grow/start a singularity. Those who fear the future or cling to the past suppress/inhibit their potentiality. Their pattern of thinking is based on genetic predisposition towards self preservation of the species. A superintelligence can predict the future to the effect of overcoming the genetic legacy by starting now. 1.Practice awareness of the changing nature of genes and culture/memes. 2. Integration of scientific and technological advances. 3. Both of the above Terry From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 14:53:02 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:53:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > If we can set up a 600,000 ton per year pipeline into space with > rockets or laser launchers, that's probably the way to go. You have > to dedicate the first 15-20 power sats to powering the lasers or > making rocket fuel, but after they are in place, the project is a net > generator of energy at a high enough rate to replace coal and oil. > > If you wonder why an old L5 guy does not promote extra terrestrial > materials, it's because of time. The singularity will come before > space industry to process them can be set up. While I think power sats are a crucial tech, I would not so quick to discard earth-based nuclear fusion... All in all, the real point is however the following: basically there are just two resources to speak of: information and energy. Give me enough of both, cheap enough, and the rest comes as a byproduct. Stefano Vaj From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 25 15:27:36 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:27:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fear of Death Message-ID: <8CA5CA3E38211D4-1254-676@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> I wrote: "> I said in my previews post "Nobody dies". If you mean by dying as the > irreversible loss of consciousness per se, no." I have no fear of death for thoughts and feelings are the side effects of genetic legacy as in memory/movement of the mind towards the past causing inattention to the present as here and now. We die a thousand times more or less within a day as the nature of memories/thoughts are ephemeral. What you are before or during birth is different from what you are now in macro scale of existence but in subatomic scale nothing dies as the law of the conservation of energy states. Lee: "Nobody dies? You are quite serious? Surely you believe that a bandit with a gun can kill you. Wouldn't you find that at least inconvenient?" My reply: It is inconvenient as a thought. Lee: "In your way of using words, how should the 30,000,000 who're no longer with us since the Great Leap Forward be described? Not as dead?" What is the great leap forward? Is that another thought? There are many thoughts much more than you and I could count the sands in all the beaches of the world so to speak even counting those that are unwritten/unexpressed. > > > Time does not exist permanently. It is all a movement of the mind. > Lee: > > "That is the sort of statement that should seriously, seriously, > > be deleted upon a re-reading just before you click on "send". > > What on Earth are your poor readers to think of such a claim??? > > Have mercy." > > My reply: Time exist as a thought so which time /thought is true? Lee: "Your reply is yet another question. Been hitting the Zen bottle, eh?" But your "Time does not exist permanently" is seriously funny! You ought to consider putting that on your tombstone! Is there a passerby whose grave aspect would not at least for a moment be lightened by such? W.C. Fields move over. ________ I don't cling to your idea of Zen. Thoughts exist for a time being before another thought comes along. What's in a thought/a name? Even language changes in time for we are time/change itself. Terry { just a thought} From bret at bonfireproductions.com Tue Mar 25 15:55:07 2008 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:55:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? In-Reply-To: <8CA5AF84974FB7A-13D8-1145@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5AF84974FB7A-13D8-1145@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <510E59EC-CEF7-4253-B9D7-8405E9D89086@bonfireproductions.com> Hello everyone. "As usual" it would seem :) a conversation not about uploading and copying and threading and singularities, and w/e has turned into a conversation about that. So here is something having to do with the thread, instead. On Mar 23, 2008, at 8:26 AM, citta437 at aol.com wrote: > _____________ > My reply: So it is still a dream/a belief not a theory or working > hypothesis for cryonics does not work by scientific method of > investigation. Hi Terry, it works currently, but in a scaled fashion. Entire "humans" are stored in liquid nitrogen, as embryos. We (species we) have also managed to vitrify entire organs that have emerged in a functioning state and have been installed in humans as donor organs. There is a great deal of information about low temperature experimentation in living humans and animals for surgical purposes, and work is being done to cryonically store larger and more complex systems using improved formulae all the time. So this is entirely a theoretical pursuit with escalating experimentation within the scientific method. It is not a dream/belief. A list of independent scientific journal articles, hosted on the Alcor website: http://www.alcor.org/sciencerefs.html Science FAQ: http://www.alcor.org/sciencefaq.htm et cetera. > My reply: Its neither you nor not you for there's no permanent person > to be identified as change occurs moment to moment in the death of > cells from a biological process during the interchange of oxygen and > carbon dioxide. The intercellular system is not a person but a > biological process among a lot of complex organ system such as brain > and its supporting structures. What is a person? Its a conventional > way > of identifying an individual by social standard/culture using > ideas/thoughts/memes. Are you still you after a heart transplant? If the intercellular system, the whole she-bang, is halted, and then restored in an undamaged state, is it still you? Until we prove otherwise, there isn't any real scientific evidence to suggest that transplantation of anything other than the brain would change "you-ness". Therefore, if the above systemic experimentation continues to yield positive results, at the rate it has in the past twenty years, and medical instrumentation continues to increase in resolution and capacity, I would say cryonics will yield its first "real" success in approximately 180 years, barring any major leap. Just look at Moore's Law, or the amount of time between the Wright Flier and the Moon landing for examples of scale. > My conclusion: Therefore cryonics is a belief not unlike a religious > belief for immortality. Simulation of collective memories are > happening > since the course of human history. > > Terry Actually, and meaning no offense, it would seem to be exactly and precisely not. More like being a fan of Apple Computer at the worst. If you want to call that religious belief, then ok. :) Cheers, ~]3 From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 25 15:57:26 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:57:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Gap bet.Cryonics and Nanotech Message-ID: <8CA5CA80C2A6598-1254-8CE@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Is as large as the gap between now and the future. Nanotech can predict the development of superintelligent machines. But what is intelligence? If it is an ability or a process of information gathering like the CIA, it is subject to error/to genetic flaw or randomness. A superintelligent machine cannot be super if it cannot create what we expect/want which is an endless/ infinity of happiness. Nanotech=superintelligent machines=happiness? There is a gap a wide gap between expectation and reality. It is like finding a theory of everything or changing the law of physics. Terry From amcmr2003 at yahoo.com.br Tue Mar 25 15:37:59 2008 From: amcmr2003 at yahoo.com.br (Antonio Marcos) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:37:59 -0300 (ART) Subject: [ExI] What Monitors the Singularity? In-Reply-To: <8CA5C9D0C820BCB-1254-2BB@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <986049.45805.qm@web50610.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Ray Kurzweil?! Mark. --- citta437 at aol.com escreveu: > > Correct me if I'm wrong ,according to the Institute > of Artificial > Intelligence, superintelligence is a self-monitoring > device. Evolution > is too slow at the rate it takes for human > intelligence to evolve from > the apes to where it is now. > > So with the aid of nanotechnology we can speed up > the growth of human > intelligence. Agreed. > All of us have a potential to grow/start a > singularity. Those who fear > the future or cling to the past suppress/inhibit > their potentiality. > Their pattern of thinking is based on genetic > predisposition towards > self preservation of the species. > > A superintelligence can predict the future to the > effect of overcoming > the genetic legacy by starting now. > > 1.Practice awareness of the changing nature of genes > and culture/memes. > > 2. Integration of scientific and technological > advances. > > 3. Both of the above > > Terry > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o ?nico sem limite de espa?o para armazenamento! http://br.mail.yahoo.com/ From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Tue Mar 25 17:43:22 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:43:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] robodog In-Reply-To: <032520080318.5313.47E86F0700040507000014C12207000953010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> References: <032520080318.5313.47E86F0700040507000014C12207000953010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <47E939BA.6060109@insightbb.com> Would be cuter with a tail...... :-) artillo at comcast.net wrote: > WOW that's pretty amazing maneuverability! The ice scene was awesome; it looked like how a deer slips and recovers to me. Imagine a swarm of those things coming over a hill, that eerie buzzing multiplied 100 fold might be enough to send some enemies running without even firing a shot. > > Asimo finally has a mount he can ride into "battle" with? > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "spike" > >> Kewall, check this! Comes with its own evil growl: >> >> >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww >> >> >> >> Notice in the ice scene. Doesn't that remind you of a big dog slipping >> around on an icy sidewalk? Does this give you new insight on biological >> systems? >> >> >> >> spike >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [ExI] robodog > From: > "spike" > Date: > Tue, 25 Mar 2008 02:20:44 +0000 > To: > "'ExI chat list'" > > To: > "'ExI chat list'" > > > Kewall, check this! Comes with its own evil growl: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww > > > > Notice in the ice scene. Doesn't that remind you of a big dog > slipping around on an icy sidewalk? Does this give you new insight on > biological systems? > > > > spike > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 16:34:41 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 09:34:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Keith wrote > The unobtainium part of the space elevator is the cable. There are > persistent rumors that the University of Cambridge has demonstrated 20 > GPa nanotube yarn, the report has been expected to be published in > science for a few months, but nothing has happened. Even 20 GPa isn't > strong enough, but it's getting there. I've never looked into this or studied it at all. But what about this? Just as we launch today's spaceships from the bottom of a big airliner or a B52, why not tether the lower end to the highest flying dirigible we can find? Cable still too heavy? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 16:46:54 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 09:46:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] And What About the Vikings? (was "an aboriginal human...") References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com><47E23297.6070601@mac.com><272901c88b15$1f053c30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080321005848.025c74e0@satx.rr.com><27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us><287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com><28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com><2d6187670803231144r51e06de9rd7f954a5c77538bd@mail.gmail.com> <1206310537_3194@S1.cableone.net> Message-ID: <675b01c88e98$2b29c4f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Keith wrote > Here is some from Araz Gat's article.... > As Kimber (1990: 163) writes with respect to Aboriginal Australia: > > The red ochre gathering expeditions... were normally all-males > parties, and although cordial relationships between groups were > sought, fighting appears to have been a common hazard faced by > travelling parties. One entire party, with the exception of one man, > is recorded as having been ambushed and killed in about 1870, whilst > in about 1874 all but one of a group of 30 men were 'entombed in the > excavations'. > > > > Between groups, the picture is not very different, and is equally > uniform. Warfare regularly involved stealing of women, who were then > subjected to multiple rape, or taken for marriage, or both. According > to Meggitt (1962: 38), if the Walbiri 'were able to surprise the ... > > > > Polygyny greatly exacerbated women's scarcity and direct and indirect > male competition and conflict over them. Indeed, a cross-cultural > study (Otterbein 1994: 103) has found polygyny to be one of the most > distinctive correlates there is of feuding and internal warfare. ... A simple question for you and all the followers of these and similar ideas: If via time machine a modern day Swedish 1-day old baby boy was swapped for a 10th century 1-day old baby boy, with no parents or medical personel being aware of our switch, could we or should we expect the two growing boys and young men to be somewhat ill-suited for their societies? In other words, if one had to speculate as to the genetic differences, in-born characteristics especially along the lines of tendencies to cooperative and non-violent behavior vs. gross insensitivity and very violent behavior, were Swedes then the same as Swedes now? Or, keeping Clark's studies in mind, might there have been significant selection pressures since the 10th century that profoundly affect behavior? Naturally, I am only asking for guesses based upon long term study of different societies and reproductive fitness. Thanks, Lee > I am not trying to make Australian Aboriginals out as either better > or worse than other hunter-gather people. Indeed the material I cut > about other groups was very similar. The point is that > hunter-gatherer life was no bowl of cherries. Western colonizing > states came along and imposed their own historically (evolutionary?) > developed limitations on violence and infanticide--which had the > predictable effect on population growth in places where the > environment could not support a larger population in a > hunter-gatherer lifestyle. > > Are such peoples worse off or better off than they were pre > contact? I could frame the question in terms such as life > expectancy, but is that even the right metric? I simply don't know. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Tue Mar 25 17:57:53 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:57:53 -0600 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> > > Contrast the world's attitude towards America with the world's > attitude towards the EU: just as rich (indeed, richer if GDP is the > measure of wealth, and the Euro may overtake the dollar as the world's > reserve currency), just as culturally dominant (even if you only > consider the extent to which American culture is transplanted European > culture), just as arrogant (ask a Frenchman or a Greek about the > significance of his country in the history of the world). And yet, > resentment of European countries around the world is often in > proportion to how easily those countries can be lumped together with > America, culturally or in the degree to which they support American > foreign policy decisions. > > Those with little power always resent those with more power. This is normal. If the US disappeared, someone else would become the "most" powerful nation and they would then become the object of disdain. Before the US it was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the French, and so it goes on. One day someone else will take the reigns - and they can be hated just the same. > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mfj.eav at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 16:56:21 2008 From: mfj.eav at gmail.com (Morris Johnson) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:56:21 -0600 Subject: [ExI] regrowing-digits-extropy-chat Digest, Vol 54, Issue 42 Message-ID: <61c8738e0803250956x3454df36n5e8521b10148226c@mail.gmail.com> This is not novel. One of the videos I looked at to prepare for the longevity dividend course described the specific materials and method. It may be at the stage of regrowing a digit end or regrowing jawbones after surgical removal of cancerous parts and not applicable to organs and whole limbs, but it is really real. MFJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Tue Mar 25 17:59:49 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:59:49 -0600 Subject: [ExI] What Monitors the Singularity? In-Reply-To: <8CA5C9D0C820BCB-1254-2BB@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CA5C9D0C820BCB-1254-2BB@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <47E93D95.6030507@insightbb.com> citta437 at aol.com wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong ,according to the Institute of Artificial > Intelligence, superintelligence is a self-monitoring device. Evolution > is too slow at the rate it takes for human intelligence to evolve from > the apes to where it is now. > > So with the aid of nanotechnology we can speed up the growth of human > intelligence. Agreed. > All of us have a potential to grow/start a singularity. Those who fear > the future or cling to the past suppress/inhibit their potentiality. > Their pattern of thinking is based on genetic predisposition towards > self preservation of the species. > > A superintelligence can predict the future to the effect of overcoming > the genetic legacy by starting now. > > 1.Practice awareness of the changing nature of genes and culture/memes. > > 2. Integration of scientific and technological advances. > > 3. Both of the above > > Terry > > > I believe Frank Herbert already covered this...... From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 17:23:38 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:23:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] And What About the Vikings? (was "an aboriginal human...") In-Reply-To: <675b01c88e98$2b29c4f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <8CA58577D48AD46-44C-2A6A@webmail-nd17.sysops.aol.com> <27ae01c88baf$252f65a0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <33698.12.77.169.67.1206145466.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <287901c88ca7$ad7e1ed0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323011531.054e1cd0@satx.rr.com> <28f501c88cb2$e676c5b0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080323125528.0237e880@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670803231144r51e06de9rd7f954a5c77538bd@mail.gmail.com> <1206310537_3194@S1.cableone.net> <675b01c88e98$2b29c4f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803251023t459864a0rd15f635f4837f756@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Keith wrote > If via time machine a modern day Swedish 1-day old baby boy > was swapped for a 10th century 1-day old baby boy, with no > parents or medical personel being aware of our switch, could > we or should we expect the two growing boys and young men > to be somewhat ill-suited for their societies? If I had to make a (semi-)educated guess, I believe that *statistically* your babies might actually be in average better suited for their own age and society. Recent research suggests that population genetics changes and evolves much more quickly than we used to think. On the other hand, nothing forbids that a single randomly-picked 10th century Swedish baby might be in fact better suited to modern-day Sweden than another randomly-picked baby having been born there, and vice-versa. You would have to take a much larger sample or a much longer time to make any such change obvious. Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 17:34:58 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:34:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803251034k1216a3dfsf8fff87dd2985833@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > Those with little power always resent those with more power. This is > normal. If the US disappeared, someone else would become the "most" powerful > nation and they would then become the object of disdain. Before the US it > was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the French, and so it goes on. > One day someone else will take the reigns - and they can be hated just the > same. There is however a difference. Globalisation, especially cultural globalisation (say, monoglottism), appears as an "Americanisation" from abroad (even though it may have little to do with any copying of the actual US society), and it is a phenomenon that has little precedents in old-style imperialism. Stefano Vaj From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 17:32:03 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:32:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net><280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us><00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z><28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <677101c88e9e$c342a1c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Kevin writes > Stathis wrote > > > Contrast the world's attitude towards America with the world's > > attitude towards the EU: just as rich (indeed, richer if GDP is the > > measure of wealth, and the Euro may overtake the dollar as the world's > > reserve currency), just as culturally dominant (even if you only > > consider the extent to which American culture is transplanted European > > culture), just as arrogant (ask a Frenchman or a Greek about the > > significance of his country in the history of the world). And yet, > > resentment of European countries around the world is often in > > proportion to how easily those countries can be lumped together with > > America, culturally or in the degree to which they support American > > foreign policy decisions. > > Those with little power always resent those with more > power. This is normal. If the US disappeared, someone > else would become the "most" powerful nation and they > would then become the object of disdain. Before the US > it was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the > French, and so it goes on. One day someone else will > take the reigns - and they can be hated just the same. Not to take away from your observation---which can still be pursued separately---we ought to address the general question of why the largest or most powerful tribe is deeply resented or hated by many, even beyond (so the hypothesis goes) what it has actually historically done against a particular nation. (The U.S., for example, is widely hated in France and Switzerland, even though France and the U.S. have been allies for 60 years, and the U.S. and Switzerland have never been enemies.) Is there a genetic basis (probably even coupled to cultural practice via cultur-gens (Lumsden and Wilson, 1981)) to the resentment of the richest or most powerful other tribe? What would be an EP explanation? Has it anything to do with Pierre Trudeau's graphic economic characterization of "being in bed with an elephant"? I really hate it when people just ask questions, without making even the least effort of an answer themselves---but here I'm doing it, but only, because of lack of time and space. Lee From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 18:04:03 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:04:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > While I think power sats are a crucial tech, I would not so quick to > discard earth-based nuclear fusion... It's not a matter of discarding it, it's the second best power source besides power sats. But it's incredibly dangerous. Not just because of such things as there being no way to get rid of he waste, come cell repair machines who will care? The problem is any neutron source can be diverted into making extremely high grade plutonium. With much of that floating around homemade city busting nukes become something a well funded street gang can make. > All in all, the real point is however the following: basically there > are just two resources to speak of: information and energy. Give me > enough of both, cheap enough, and the rest comes as a byproduct. You need materials, but given lots of energy you can almost get by on dirt. Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 18:05:48 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:05:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I should also mention the energy payback time. It's fairly long for reactors, and in the range of a few months for power sats--assuming they can be done at all. Keith From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Tue Mar 25 19:11:02 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:11:02 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Power resentment [ WAS Re: America: Home of All Evil] In-Reply-To: <677101c88e9e$c342a1c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> <677101c88e9e$c342a1c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47E94E46.70201@insightbb.com> >> Those with little power always resent those with more >> power. This is normal. If the US disappeared, someone >> else would become the "most" powerful nation and they >> would then become the object of disdain. Before the US >> it was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the >> French, and so it goes on. One day someone else will >> take the reigns - and they can be hated just the same. >> > > Not to take away from your observation---which can still > be pursued separately---we ought to address the general > question of why the largest or most powerful tribe is > deeply resented or hated by many, even beyond (so the > hypothesis goes) what it has actually historically done > against a particular nation. (The U.S., for example, is widely > hated in France and Switzerland, even though France and > the U.S. have been allies for 60 years, and the U.S. and > Switzerland have never been enemies.) > > Is there a genetic basis (probably even coupled to cultural > practice via cultur-gens (Lumsden and Wilson, 1981)) to > the resentment of the richest or most powerful other tribe? > What would be an EP explanation? Has it anything to do > with Pierre Trudeau's graphic economic characterization > of "being in bed with an elephant"? I really hate it when > people just ask questions, without making even the least > effort of an answer themselves---but here I'm doing it, > but only, because of lack of time and space. > > > This is indeed an interesting avenue of discussion. I am certain that there is an EP explanation that runs deep but whether it is genetic or memetic will be tough to sort out. At first glance it doesn't make sense that those without the power in an inheritable scenario would be the one's passing on the genes. If that's the case then it's memetic and not genetic. But I seem to recall a similar scenario in chimps and baboons. I can't recall it specifically so I'll have to dig up some research. I'll change the topic and we can address it later when we have time to. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Tue Mar 25 18:13:30 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:13:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Evil/Immorality is in the eye of the beholder. Message-ID: <8CA5CBB105BA532-1254-12D0@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Lee: "I consider that view (Noam Chomsky's view, if I'm not mistaken) to be merely delusional. But it can slide imperceptibly towards: Much more serious---and the whole point---is the hatred or at least rather bitter resentment felt by many around the world that at first blush appears focused on annoyance at America's foreign policy, or upon its economic "domination", or upon its "arrogance". It is these three last things that must be discussed, but I'm out of time at the moment." ______________ Thoughts are not evil or immoral. If there are no minds to put the thoughts into action/into beliefs there would be no hatred, bitter resentment and perceptions of arrogance. Beliefs of superiority or feelings of inferiority arise from genes and memes. Illusions and delusions are genetic behavior which are neither evil nor immoral. Society value what it sees to be beneficial to the majority of it's members. Within each society there are also conflicting values/memes leading to confusion/entropy. The extropian community value the idea of superintelligence to create a utopian landscape. I like the idea of a utopia and superintelligence. How do I contribute to the realization of this idea? 1. Financial contribution 2. Sharing constructive ideas 3. Living in awareness without expectations of happiness 4. Living up to my potential as a singularity. 5. All of the above What a tall order. Terry 4. From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 25 18:22:34 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:22:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath ? In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080325131845.0269ae40@satx.rr.com> What have all you guys got against Gigi, and why do you want to discuss the poor girl's death? (I'm surprised that my friend Lee Corbin hasn't pitched a fit at this munged subject line by now, but maybe his teeth are all worn down, like mine, from gnashing...) Damien Broderick From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Tue Mar 25 19:25:53 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:25:53 -0600 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: <580930c20803251034k1216a3dfsf8fff87dd2985833@mail.gmail.com> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <280a01c88c56$ab445f40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <34117.12.77.168.194.1206219675.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> <580930c20803251034k1216a3dfsf8fff87dd2985833@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47E951C1.8070401@insightbb.com> Stefano Vaj wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > >> Those with little power always resent those with more power. This is >> normal. If the US disappeared, someone else would become the "most" powerful >> nation and they would then become the object of disdain. Before the US it >> was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the French, and so it goes on. >> One day someone else will take the reigns - and they can be hated just the >> same. >> > > There is however a difference. Globalisation, especially cultural > globalisation (say, monoglottism), appears as an "Americanisation" > from abroad (even though it may have little to do with any copying of > the actual US society), and it is a phenomenon that has little > precedents in old-style imperialism. > > Stefano Vaj > _______________________________________________ > > I agree. I wonder why given that, aside from redneckism, American culture is largely grown from a mix of various other cultures that despise us. Is it the fact that most of us would gladly do business with, work with, or marry others of different cultures despite our differences? Is that somehow viewed by others as being unprincipled? Any other ideas? Why do you think this is? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 25 18:26:00 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:26:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080325132417.0259f2a8@satx.rr.com> At 11:04 AM 3/25/2008 -0700, Keith wrote: >Stefano Vaj: > > While I think power sats are a crucial tech, I would not so quick to > > discard earth-based nuclear fusion... > >it's incredibly dangerous. ... The problem is any neutron source can >be diverted into >making extremely high grade plutonium. With much of that floating >around homemade city busting nukes become something a well funded >street gang can make. From fusion reactors? Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Tue Mar 25 18:30:04 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:30:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting References: <200803250054.m2P0rp2h011815@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <677701c88ea6$7cc3ef30$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Spike writes > BillK! I demand a discount, since some of my posts were posts scolding you > guys for overposting! Those shouldn't count. Since I am only two posts > ahead of Lee (well, OK, three now).... Good point! I would have *creamed* you without those overhead posts required by your job as moderator. Eat my dust, pal. Lee From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 19:42:28 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:42:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > While I think power sats are a crucial tech, I would not so quick to > > discard earth-based nuclear fusion... > > It's not a matter of discarding it, it's the second best power source > besides power sats. > > But it's incredibly dangerous. Not just because of such things as > there being no way to get rid of he waste, come cell repair machines > who will care? The problem is any neutron source can be diverted into > making extremely high grade plutonium. With much of that floating > around homemade city busting nukes become something a well funded > street gang can make. I am afraid that unless we are ready to go for solutions making *1984* and *Brave New World* blush, we are eventually going to have to live with it anyway. It is not as if we can forever prevent people - let alone governments - from playing with neutrons. Inertia-based or tokamak-like fusion reactors, however, are not exactly your everyday primary-school science show-and-tell homeworks, for the time being. And speaking of WMD, there are many other equally dangerous alternatives not too far away. In any event, it has never been too clear to me why the president of the US of A should be trusted more not to get too nervous with the finger on the trigger than any other entity... > You need materials, but given lots of energy you can almost get by on dirt. Yes, that's exactly my point. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 19:57:51 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:57:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil In-Reply-To: <47E951C1.8070401@insightbb.com> References: <032020081245.957.47E25C5C00036DE2000003BD2200735834010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> <00d301c88c71$d5bee630$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <28e101c88cb1$7f1f5900$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <66e501c88e2d$a35665c0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <47E93D21.1030404@insightbb.com> <580930c20803251034k1216a3dfsf8fff87dd2985833@mail.gmail.com> <47E951C1.8070401@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803251257t3650b4d4mda7ad31bdab9806@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 8:25 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > I agree. I wonder why given that, aside from redneckism, American culture > is largely grown from a mix of various other cultures that despise us. Is it > the fact that most of us would gladly do business with, work with, or marry > others of different cultures despite our differences? Is that somehow viewed > by others as being unprincipled? Any other ideas? Why do you think this is? > Mmhhh. Good questions. I think that the real issue is not hybridisation - this has always taken place, and nobody ever made such a great fuss about it. Rather, it is the feeling that "Americanisation" leads to an entropic loss of diversity, cultural identities, popular sovereignties, different destinies, and so forth. Russian domination was hated in Eastern Europe when the iron curtain was up, but the repressed nationalities immediately bounced back as soon as soviet military control was over. People feeling threatened by the "Americanisation" of their countries fear the threat of a loss of their "soul", whatever this may mean in their specific contexts. Getting back to transhumanism, the idea of a globally-enforced New World Order where diverse collective options - i.e., as with what technologies or posthuman changes are acceptable and what are not in a given system of law - would be strictly limited is not an entirely comforting thought. From Bush's ONU resolution on cloning and genetic engineering to Fukuyama's End of History to Huxley's *Brave New World* there is some common ground that may not be too well received by people who would rather make whatever they like with their future, including in indisputably "western" countries such as France or Italy or Spain or Switzerland. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 20:47:08 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:47:08 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: The geostationary orbital distance is somewhere around 22,000 miles out, and to counterbalance what all hangs below you need a counterweight further out than that. Anything shorter and it would all come crashing down (actually it would never get up there in the first place.) Low earth orbital distance however, starts at the "top" of the atmosphere, round about 100 miles up. So the whole space elevator thing has to be more than 220 times longer than the distance to "outer space". Now, mature nanotech and carbon nanotubes might very well make it feasible, but setting aside my committed disinclination to naysaying, I just can't help thinking that the space elevator is..., well..., tending somewhat toward the "crackpottish". [My apologies if I have hurt anyone's feelings.] I have a bett..., ur..., different idea. An inflated structure -- dome or tube or ramp-like thingie -- with the topmost part up there above the hundred mile mark. Even if it were a thousand miles long and a hundred miles high(at the high point) it would still be a fraction of the size of the space elevator, and substantially cheaper -- my opinion -- and easier to construct -- since fabrication and setup would all take place on good ol' terra firma. This is part of a much bigger project (of mine) which I'm sharing with youse guys and gals on account of your being folks of like mind -- you know, technophiles, first adopters, vanguard of the technorati and all. But I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't spread it around too much, you know, just your best buds and those likely to be friendly toward such notions. Mum's the word, mostly. Best, Jeff Davis "When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty. I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Keith wrote > > > The unobtainium part of the space elevator is the cable. There are > > persistent rumors that the University of Cambridge has demonstrated 20 > > GPa nanotube yarn, the report has been expected to be published in > > science for a few months, but nothing has happened. Even 20 GPa isn't > > strong enough, but it's getting there. > > I've never looked into this or studied it at all. But what about this? > Just as we launch today's spaceships from the bottom of a big > airliner or a B52, why not tether the lower end to the highest > flying dirigible we can find? Cable still too heavy? > > Lee > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 20:56:30 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:56:30 -0600 Subject: [ExI] safer now; In-Reply-To: References: <200803170037.m2H0bRn2003683@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <000501c8892a$fb623c10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <026f01c88a24$1ea9cf40$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <011d01c88c7b$3d073e10$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> <2d6187670803231018v4c15daf2lc505a3a2bb0a9e71@mail.gmail.com> <022c01c88d0e$674edfa0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 6:45 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > ...public sector entrepreneurialism. Correction: I meant *****private***** sector entrepreneurialism. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles From moses2k at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 21:08:12 2008 From: moses2k at gmail.com (Chris Petersen) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:08:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath ? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080325131845.0269ae40@satx.rr.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080325131845.0269ae40@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <3aff9e290803251408n4ebdc186m494f112fbfb8a12d@mail.gmail.com> I took it as a reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibibit -Chris On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > What have all you guys got against Gigi, and why do you want to > discuss the poor girl's death? > > (I'm surprised that my friend Lee Corbin hasn't pitched a fit at this > munged subject line by now, but maybe his teeth are all worn down, > like mine, from gnashing...) > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 25 21:38:11 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:38:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath ? In-Reply-To: <3aff9e290803251408n4ebdc186m494f112fbfb8a12d@mail.gmail.co m> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080325131845.0269ae40@satx.rr.com> <3aff9e290803251408n4ebdc186m494f112fbfb8a12d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080325163529.024f8c08@satx.rr.com> At 04:08 PM 3/25/2008 -0500, Chris wrote: >I took it as a reference to >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibibit Sorry, no cigar. That'd be Gibideath. As in "Gibilibitty, or gibideath!" From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 21:38:36 2008 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:38:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Network segmentation was Re: America: Home of All Evil Message-ID: <7641ddc60803251438i6a2b6e5dwc35b51c210010aef@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > > Is there a genetic basis (probably even coupled to cultural > practice via cultur-gens (Lumsden and Wilson, 1981)) to > the resentment of the richest or most powerful other tribe? > What would be an EP explanation? Has it anything to do > with Pierre Trudeau's graphic economic characterization > of "being in bed with an elephant"? I really hate it when > people just ask questions, without making even the least > effort of an answer themselves---but here I'm doing it, > but only, because of lack of time and space. ### Here is my interpretation: Network segmentation is crucial for survival. By network segmentation I mean (as in a previous post), the division of social and other (i.e. telecommunications, software, ecological) networks into interacting but distinctive subnetworks that differ in their network protocols sufficiently to prevent spreading of networked modes of failure. All highly complex networks are prone to the spreading of deleterious and unforeseen influences. By unforeseen I mean also "not yet weeded out by natural selection". By influences I mean viruses, computer viruses, power surges, memes, and other problems depending on the type of network in question (immune, IP, electric power, legal-right-to-kill). In our evolutionary history there were millions of little tribal networks and subnetworks that formed, and mutated. The legalized right to kill (within a network) and the ability to kill (between small networks) had a profound impact on the survival of constituent nodes of these networks (i.e. humans) and provided strong selective pressure acting through the selection of individual preferences that could produce more stable networks. It is more difficult to kill people if the right to kill is limited, or if the physical ability to kill is limited by a balance of forces. Tribes insisting on the limitation of power of leaders and neighbors were more likely to have a stable existence, improving the fitness of people who dislike being dominated. The need for network segmentation is even more important now than in our evolutionary past, unfortunately the innate segmentation instinct (that contributes to the negative opinions of the US) is not strong enough. It does not suffice to maintain segmentation which is why I am writing the email on PC running some sort of Windows OS, and lots of losers fall for nationalistic or worse, United-Nations type feelings. If we survive the singularity and get uploaded, network security and therefore the need for network segmentation, will mean much more than protection from spam. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 25 22:51:55 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:51:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803251751.55860.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Jeff Davis wrote: > I have a bett..., ur..., different idea. ?An inflated structure -- > dome or tube or ramp-like thingie -- with the topmost part up there > above the hundred mile mark. Even if it were a thousand miles long > and a hundred miles high(at the high point) it would still be a > fraction of the size of the space elevator, and substantially cheaper > -- my opinion -- and easier to construct -- since fabrication and > setup would all take place on good ol' terra firma. I did the calculations for this scenario. Things are not favorable. Have you thought about using water instead? You'd need 2E11 liters, and there's 3.26E21 liters on the planet. You'd need 10^18 joules to pump it up if you could find water running at 1 m/sec^2. To get that many joules you'd need 100,000 copies of the Fat Man atomic bomb. You'd need a few hundred kg of uranium, so $20k USD just for the uranium (assuming $45/lb -- I checked the net and this might be right). > This is part of a much bigger project (of mine) which I'm sharing > with youse guys and gals on account of your being folks of like mind > -- you know, technophiles, first adopters, vanguard of the technorati > and all. ?But I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't spread it around too > much, you know, just your best buds and those likely to be friendly > toward such notions. ?Mum's the word, mostly. You are cruel: why share a good idea and ask us not to implement it? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From moses2k at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 00:38:00 2008 From: moses2k at gmail.com (Chris Petersen) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:38:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath ? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080325163529.024f8c08@satx.rr.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080325131845.0269ae40@satx.rr.com> <3aff9e290803251408n4ebdc186m494f112fbfb8a12d@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080325163529.024f8c08@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <3aff9e290803251738v6e05bfc9q124a53ea65be8866@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 04:08 PM 3/25/2008 -0500, Chris wrote: > > >I took it as a reference to > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibibit > > Sorry, no cigar. That'd be Gibideath. As in "Gibilibitty, or gibideath!" Yeah, noticed after posting. So...I just had a neat little experience. I searched for 'Gigideath' on Google (in Seamonkey with NoScript), hit the first link (a MySpace profile), saw a partially loaded page and then had my WinXP GUI completely lock-up, mouse and all. After a hard-reboot and a full AV and ARk scan, I tried it in Firefox with no problem; the culprit was apparently a ani-gif background. The punchline, of course, being that you could say that I had a gigideath of my own. ...if you really wanted to. Cheers. -Chris P.S. Black text on black; it's Geocities all over again. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 03:29:53 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:29:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Keith wrote > > > The unobtainium part of the space elevator is the cable. There are > > persistent rumors that the University of Cambridge has demonstrated 20 > > GPa nanotube yarn, the report has been expected to be published in > > science for a few months, but nothing has happened. Even 20 GPa isn't > > strong enough, but it's getting there. > > I've never looked into this or studied it at all. But what about this? > Just as we launch today's spaceships from the bottom of a big > airliner or a B52, why not tether the lower end to the highest > flying dirigible we can find? Cable still too heavy? Think about it. The highest you can go with a balloon is about 100,000 feet. That's 20 miles out of 22,000. The Wikipedia article has the space elevator math worked out. Keith From dharris234 at mindspring.com Wed Mar 26 03:13:23 2008 From: dharris234 at mindspring.com (David C. Harris) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:13:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47E9BF53.3080300@mindspring.com> I've been participating in the GLTB support/discussion group at the Palo Alto Unitarian-Universalist church, as a straight ("but not narrow", in fact kinda kinky) "ally" member. As a biochemist by training, I've been very interested in the biology of transgender people. So far my working hypothesis is that hormones during critical times of fetal development determine separately (a) what sex we feel we are and (b) what sex we are attracted to and of course (c) what our genitals look like. The article seems to say that the transgender male still has female organs like ovaries and uterus, but takes testosterone to get male horniness, muscle development, and appearance (like facial hair). If hormones are the explanation, it matters whether the baby is XX or XY. If XX, the exogenous (from outside) testosterone would act like the endogenous (produced inside) testosterone of an XY fetus, and would push development along the male path. If the fetus is XY, the exogenous testosterone would add to the effect of the baby's own testosterone and push it quite firmly down the male path. It is possible that testosterone was discontinued during this pregnancy, or even in order to have this pregnancy. I sure hope the medical details will be reported, as the baby's development --- even its conception --- has implications for a variety of questions. If the exogenous testosterone was not taken during the pregnancy, the hormonal environment would be like a typical fetal environment during a pregnancy, and XX would become female, with XY becoming male. There is another set of hormonal cases that are probably much more common. Before I met her, my ex-wife was a rather spacey young woman who took birth control pills but not reliably. She became pregnant with an XY fetus, and did not know that she was pregnant for most of the fetal development. She continued to take her birth control pills, dosing the XY fetus with female hormones. Her son was adopted out after birth, but reunited with her in his early 20's. My ex had told me the history and I recognized the possible battle between masculinizing and feminizing hormones, so I observed him closely during the few visits they had. He seemed very emotionally expressive, like a young woman, but had a body shaped by his endogenous testosterone since he left the womb. I respected his privacy and did not inquire about his genital size or development. - David Harris B.K. DeLong wrote: > I've been really thinking about this a lot and while I think it's > wonderful that this is possible, I wonder how both the body of the > carrier and the fetus will be effected by the chemistry of the > transgendered body. > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Amara Graps > wrote: > > Unbelievably cool.... The more body morphing, the better, for our wild > and wonderful future! > > ... > -- > B.K. DeLong (K3GRN) > bkdelong at pobox.com > +1.617.797.8471 > > http://www.wkdelong.org Son. > http://www.ianetsec.com Work. > http://www.bostonredcross.org Volunteer. > http://www.carolingia.eastkingdom.org Service. > http://bkdelong.livejournal.com Play. > > > PGP Fingerprint: > 38D4 D4D4 5819 8667 DFD5 A62D AF61 15FF 297D 67FE > > FOAF: > http://foaf.brain-stream.org From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 04:01:24 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:31:24 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 Message-ID: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/24/what-will-life-be-like-in-the-year-2008/ Really, a pretty damned good shot with a lot of those predictions. And the stuff thats wrong, well, in a lot of cases it damns us more than damns the writer. Most of it should exist. Why doesn't it? We seem to have spent decades on frippery, as far as I can see. Great technology, pity about the application... -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From fauxever at sprynet.com Wed Mar 26 04:00:57 2008 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:00:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can Message-ID: <017701c88ef5$ff15ce50$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Maybe Barack Obama can't say it, but Sam Harris, can ... and does: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/what-barack-obama-could-n_b_92771.html Here's hoping ... Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 12:00:55 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:00:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Memes change faster than genes Message-ID: <8CA5D502E277C65-15F8-487@webmail-nc11.sysops.aol.com> "Stefano Vaj wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > >> Those with little power always resent those with more power. This is >> normal. If the US disappeared, someone else would become the "most" powerful >> nation and they would then become the object of disdain. Before the US it >> was Germany, and Russia, and the British and the French, and so it goes on. >> One day someone else will take the reigns - and they can be hated just the >> same. >> > > There is however a difference. Globalisation, especially cultural > globalisation (say, monoglottism), appears as an "Americanisation" > from abroad (even though it may have little to do with any copying of > the actual US society), and it is a phenomenon that has little > precedents in old-style imperialism. > > Stefano Vaj > _______________________________________________ > > I agree. I wonder why given that, aside from redneckism, American culture is largely grown from a mix of various other cultures that despise us. Is it the fact that most of us would gladly do business with, work with, or marry others of different cultures despite our differences? Is that somehow viewed by others as being unprincipled? Any other ideas? Why do you think this is? ______________________ I don't think about cultural differentiation. I don't think about what others think. Just pay attention to all the changes in scientific and technological advances. We have all the means to be happy right here and now so to speak. Those who always think about memes and their values are sidetrack by the very memes they value. Just wait a minute and memes will change faster than you think. Terry {Secular humanist} From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 12:18:29 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:18:29 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can References: <017701c88ef5$ff15ce50$6601a8c0@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <008a01c88f3b$826af830$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Olga Bourlin>Maybe Barack Obama can't say it, but Sam Harris, can ... and does: >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/what-barack-obama-could-n_b_92771.html >Here's hoping ... Sam Harris is way bolder when he writes than when he speaks. Every time I see him speak he gives me an impression of being too bland. Chris Hitchens is more of my type. But I liked this text very much. From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 13:14:14 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:14:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Competition creates either entropy or extropy Message-ID: <8CA5D5A6C2FD309-15F8-58B@webmail-nc11.sysops.aol.com> The desire to compete for food or mate is embedded in the amydala{ the seat for emotion} in primates. Extropians who work along with neruobiologists know this. By now they must have the technology to by pass this structure by modification i.e. by using cognitive therapy or in conjunction with therapeutic/prescribed drugs which effects are gradual so other pharmaceutical co. advertize a faster and longer acting drugs at a higher cost to increase their profits, thus causing entropy. Philosophy and anthropology are memes that can thwart the advances in science and technology by humane values in the guise of altruism. They want to sell their ideas/books to spread memetic behavior. However when those disciplines use scientific and technological devices in their chosen profession then that would be extropian practice not entropic behavior. Individuals who are drawn to emotionalism rather than to rationality may have a hard time studying philosophy imho. They can be sidetrack towards other interests and the worst scenario they can imagine. So competition can either be entropic or extropic but not both at the same time. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 14:30:12 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:30:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Extropian Principles are Memes. Message-ID: <8CA5D6508B66BE5-15F8-CEF@webmail-nc11.sysops.aol.com> Attachment to the principles without practice of the scientific method leads to entropy imho. True extropians are unbelievers of theories knowing scientific theories are mere theories until applied/tested. How do you test the extropian principles if they truly work? Extropian principles ride on current laws of physics and chemistry. When new laws of physics are discovered true extropians are aware at all times the implication of the new scientific discoveries applicable to the advancement toward extropic behavior. Some principles that work before may no longer work now [I cannot cite an instance}. My point is there is no general theory applicable universally at all times past and future. Working what we have right now {genetic modification for instance} leads to solutions for specific problems and being aware of the scientific method leads to further investigation and discoveries. Terry From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 15:02:18 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:02:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Practicing the Brain muscle Message-ID: <8CA5D6984B8D841-15F8-1001@webmail-nc11.sysops.aol.com> If I may quote: ""The pleasure and joy that arise in dependence on the eye: this is the gratification in the eye. That the eye is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this is the danger in the eye. The removal and abandonment of desire and lust from the eye: this is the escape from the eye." -Buddha, "The Connected Discourses of the Buddha" __________ Hi, not to proselitize or inject guilt but just practicing this brain muscle on critical thinking about the above quote. In other words see no harm/evil, hear no evil/harmful thoughts, speak no evil and there is no evil intent if I may add. We listen to our thoughts but don't think thoughts are realization of evil or good. Desires are natural genetic tendencies of primates who have brain. The problem arise when we are attached to primitive behaviors. What are primitive behavior? The song advertised on TV says : "I want it all, I want it now." Modification of primitive behavior as in cognitive therapy sometimes work on brains that are developing slowly. Instant gratification is the objective of some who are attached to primitive behavior without practicing awareness to create extropy and avoid entropy. Just practicing the brain :-P Terry From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Mar 26 15:02:48 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:02:48 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can Message-ID: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> > Olga Bourlin>Maybe Barack Obama can't say it, but Sam Harris, can ... and > does: > >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/what-barack-obama-could-n_b_92771.html > >Here's hoping ... > > Mr. Harris seems to be drawing the false conclusion that it Obama would have severed his relationship with Wright and his church that he was severing his relationship with his religion. As long as he made clear publicly that the reason he was changing churches was to embrace what he thought was a truer teaching of the principals of Christianity other Christians would have applauded and perhaps even followed his example. Mr. Harris seems to be portraying Obama as a closet atheist who must stay with his church and pretend to believe if he is to have a chance at election. I hope Mr. Harris's depiction of Obama is based his imagination and not any inside information. Because any man who would be so hypocritical, deceitful, dishonest, and manipulative as to pretend to believe in a religion just to get get elected would be the last person I would ever want to see elected into the highest office of this land. I know what Mr. Harris believes in now. I just wish I knew what the real Obama believes and what he couldn't or wouldn't say! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 15:21:13 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:21:13 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can In-Reply-To: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> References: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <580930c20803260821y6c8dbaa8m19c061883cdefb16@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 4:02 PM, wrote: > Mr. Harris seems to be drawing the false conclusion that it Obama would have > severed his relationship > with Wright and his church that he was severing his relationship with his > religion. > > As long as he made clear publicly that the reason he was changing churches > was to embrace what he > thought was a truer teaching of the principals of Christianity other > Christians would have applauded and > perhaps even followed his example. > > Mr. Harris seems to be portraying Obama as a closet atheist who must stay > with his church and pretend > to believe if he is to have a chance at election. > > I hope Mr. Harris's depiction of Obama is based his imagination and not any > inside information. > Because any man who would be so hypocritical, deceitful, dishonest, and > manipulative as to pretend to believe in a religion just to get > get elected would be the last person I would ever want to see elected into > the highest office of this land. I beg to differ. I am not a US citizen, but I believe that the pratical requirement to stay with one's church, or at least with *a* church, any church, reflects more badly on the society that imposes it that on the candidate that has to conform with such expectation if he wants to have a chance. Moreover, as much as I hate hypocrisy and dishonesty, I would live with it any day if the alternative were not just somebody who bows and defers to the superstitions and beliefs concerned for the sake of being elected, but somebody who even actually *believes* in them... Stefano Vaj From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Wed Mar 26 16:34:43 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:34:43 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can In-Reply-To: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> References: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <47EA7B23.20900@insightbb.com> I can't say I'm for or against Obama at this point, but from what I can tell, he's been involved with this church much longer than he has been running for elected offices. If I am wrong here, feel free to correct me. I can say from experience, it is much more complicated to break away from a church than disassociating with the minister. There are often very strong ties to the people who make up the congregation itself. To sever the relationships with them all because of one person would not seem reasonable unless one was running for a high profile political office where this would be an issue. So the question then becomes "Should one sever many relationships built up over years simply because one is running for president". One could argue that separation from a church does not separate you from the rest of the congregation, but this argument would likely be made only by those who have not been a part of such a thing. The minister is not the church. The best example I could give would be someone here running for president and deciding to withdraw from here entirely because of some of Robert Bradbury's posts. (Where has he been by the way?)Of course, it's not a great example, only the closest I can come for some who have never been exposed to the church environment. aiguy at comcast.net wrote: > > > Olga Bourlin>Maybe Barack Obama can't say it, but Sam Harris, can > ... and > > does: > > > >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/what-barack-obama-could-n_b_92771.html > > > >Here's hoping ... > > > > > Mr. Harris seems to be drawing the false conclusion that it Obama > would have severed his relationship > with Wright and his church that he was severing his relationship with > his religion. > > As long as he made clear publicly that the reason he was changing > churches was to embrace what he > thought was a truer teaching of the principals of Christianity other > Christians would have applauded and > perhaps even followed his example. > > Mr. Harris seems to be portraying Obama as a closet atheist who must > stay with his church and pretend > to believe if he is to have a chance at election. > > I hope Mr. Harris's depiction of Obama is based his imagination and > not any inside information. > > Because any man who would be so hypocritical, deceitful, dishonest, > and manipulative as to pretend to believe in a religion just to get > get elected would be the last person I would ever want to see elected > into the highest office of this land. > > I know what Mr. Harris believes in now. I just wish I knew what the > real Obama believes and what he couldn't or wouldn't say! > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 26 15:48:08 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:48:08 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant Message-ID: I think that his mixing the genders in the way he did (probably, he felt that he had no choice) demonstrates the spectrum of the genders. I think that this is fantastic, wonderful news. I do wonder why this man is had such a hard time getting medical support. I would think an enterprising doctor would leap at the opportunity to be involved with such a novel procedure and event. I think that the doctor's career would not suffer while he helped out someone who clearly demonstrates courage and could use some support. David Harris: >The article seems to say that the transgender male still has female >organs like ovaries and uterus, but takes testosterone to get male >horniness, muscle development, and appearance (like facial hair). If >hormones are the explanation, it matters whether the baby is XX or XY. >If XX, the exogenous (from outside) testosterone would act like the >endogenous (produced inside) testosterone of an XY fetus, and would push >development along the male path. If the fetus is XY, the exogenous >testosterone would add to the effect of the baby's own testosterone and >push it quite firmly down the male path. I would guess an important factor is how much endogenous testosterone is normally produced in men and women (pregnant) and in fetuses. It has an important role in both men _and_ women. I was also surprised and pleased that this interesting transgender man needed no help to conceive. The injections of estrogens, progesterone, stimulants, etc. in the IVF procedure is a pain in the butt. The medical industry (note the assisted reproductive technology industry is *huge*), will need to come up with easier ways for women (and other transgender males :-) ) to have that business be more endurable (is that a word?). Presently, the main support (*hint* to transhumanists) to women going through IVF is others going through the same. Witness what you find on YouTube: Lupron Shot http://youtube.com/watch?v=7sKKDH9qCkE Step 1 Lupron http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZMt6htu5cJM 1st Lupron Injection (first shot by an amateur couple) http://youtube.com/watch?v=r4l9HGNrY0g 1st Lupron Injection 2nd Time Around (same couple, second IVF round) Now they have experience... http://youtube.com/watch?v=ELxqD3XsFxg Follistim and Menupure http://youtube.com/watch?v=HoBDzjjq3XI IVF Journey Entry #1 (Lupron here plus others the stims) http://youtube.com/watch?v=NkzSc9hyH2Q IVF Journey Entry #2 (not Lupron, but the others) http://youtube.com/watch?v=tEVqR_Sx2aw IVF Diary Injections (not Lupron injection here, only stim) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lewambn5zGo Giving myself a Progesterone in Oil IVF injection http://youtube.com/watch?v=POA2Lo5LgE0 A guided tour of the IVF procedure http://youtube.com/watch?v=3WypK9TpD34&feature=related Amara P.S. I am assuming that the majority of transhumanists are unaware of details of the most common medical assisted reproductive technology while they are conversing about their more esoteric ideas. I wish to be proven wrong. ;-) -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Wed Mar 26 17:09:19 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:09:19 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> I was just pondering some of these things the other day. Is it me, or does it seem to others that on some things we are completely missing the boat? 2008 and we still can't do better than concrete and asphalt for roads? Air-traffic control is a joke. My hair is falling out and there's nothing to be done about it. And where is that caries vaccine? I need it bad. I inherited soft teeth from my mother and my mouth has already cost me $15,000 by 36 years of age. I have been working on a complete tear down and rebuild of my home for several years and sometimes it just amazes me how archaic the processes are and how much technology goes into them. I have high-tech lithium-ion powered framing nailers, a laser sliding mitre saw, and an insulation blower but still what I am resorting to is sticking shaped trees together with metal pins and cramming stuffing into the middle to hold in the warmth. Even worse is the need to thread the entire structure with pipes and wires. As much fun as I have with the framing nailer I can't help but to be a bit disappointed in my fancy log cabin from time to time. I should be able to design the thing on my computer and just print my new rooms with a giant ink-jet; power and plumbing integrated just like an IC chip. I know a lot of priorities changed in the 70s - especially with transportation and space travel. Telecommuting was barely touched in this essay but one has to wonder why the 300 mile trip was even necessary given his "TV phone" and other capabilities. I'm not too concerned with our abilities to transport people because of the coming abilities to telecommute. Real travel in the future will likely be an unnecessary luxury. I couldn't quite figure out the purpose of the domes. I have often seen these in sci-fi and future predictions but to what end I have no idea. If the reason was because the air outside the domes was too terrible to bear, I would think that this failed prediction is a good thing. Let's hope we can always refrain from putting domes over our cities. It's nice to see some of the more interesting things actually happening. Personal rides in the ISS and submarines are available - albeit expensive. I can't wait till the price comes down so I can go. I guess the most unsettling thing is that we haven't reduced the number of diseases and found cures for the remaining ones. Instead, we've discovered many more. We have some really cool stuff, but even a basic blood test that can detect all cancers eludes us. Solar cells still suck. And mileage for vehicles hasn't changed much in 20 years. Let's hope the next 40 years are better than the last. Emlyn wrote: > http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/24/what-will-life-be-like-in-the-year-2008/ > > Really, a pretty damned good shot with a lot of those predictions. And > the stuff thats wrong, well, in a lot of cases it damns us more than > damns the writer. Most of it should exist. Why doesn't it? We seem to > have spent decades on frippery, as far as I can see. Great technology, > pity about the application... > > From pharos at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 16:31:02 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:31:02 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > I was just pondering some of these things the other day. Is it me, or > does it seem to others that on some things we are completely missing the > boat? 2008 and we still can't do better than concrete and asphalt for > roads? Air-traffic control is a joke. My hair is falling out and > there's nothing to be done about it. And where is that caries vaccine? I > need it bad. I inherited soft teeth from my mother and my mouth has > already cost me $15,000 by 36 years of age. > He missed the hours a day that 2008 people spend on 'so-called' communicating. It is now essential to keep all your friends constantly informed as to where you are, where you are going to and what you are doing / thinking. And discussing where other friends are and what they are doing. When did it become essential to be constantly chatting / emailing / texting / IMing / blogging to some invisible companion(s), no matter what else you are supposed to be doing? Nobody thinks any more. We have become a civilization of gossips. BillK From jonkc at att.net Wed Mar 26 16:32:44 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:32:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080325132417.0259f2a8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <05f301c88f5f$106aa9f0$3bef4d0c@MyComputer> Keith wrote: >it's [fusion] incredibly dangerous. The problem is > any neutron source can be diverted into making > extremely high grade plutonium. Oh I don't know, I think the cat is already out of the bag. Right know there are hundreds, probably thousands of tons of Plutonium on the planet, I'm not sure a little more would make things significantly more dangerous than they are now. Damien Broderick Wrote: > From fusion reactors? Yes. Most of the energy produced in a deuterium-tritium reaction is in the form of high speed neutrons; if you pack common cheap U238 around a fusion reactor then you've got yourself a Plutonium factory. Even without the U238 these neutrons would cause problems with magnetic confined fusion as they would make the entire machine radioactive and cause mechanical weakness in the parts. This would be less of a concern for LASER inertial confinement fusion and no problem at all if you used a deuterium-helium 3 reaction, but there's not much helium 3 on Earth (although there's plenty in comets and in the outer moons) and you'd need ever higher temperature and pressure than in the D-T reaction. John K Clark From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Mar 26 16:54:39 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:54:39 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can Message-ID: <032620081654.16956.47EA7FCF000BD16A0000423C2206424613979A09070E@comcast.net> From: "Stefano Vaj" said: > I beg to differ. I am not a US citizen, but I believe that the > pratical requirement to stay with one's church, or at least with *a* > church, any church, reflects more badly on the society that imposes it > that on the candidate that has to conform with such expectation if he > wants to have a chance. > > Moreover, as much as I hate hypocrisy and dishonesty, I would live > with it any day if the alternative were not just somebody who bows and > defers to the superstitions and beliefs concerned for the sake of > being elected, but somebody who even actually *believes* in them... My Reponse: The practical requirement to stay with a church in order to get elected is a byproduct or the wishes of the majority. And the will of the majority and their right to vote for a candidate they are comfortable with is what demcarcy is all about. So assuming your hypothetical candidate was willing to lie about his faith and religious affiliation. How would you know to vote for him? How could you believe his stance on any other issues which were important to you, because he could be lieing about those as well. When we reduce an election to a popularity contest on who has more charisma , is a better speaker and tells the majority whatever they believe the majority wants to hear then we are abusing the very democracy and freedom to choose who will govern us. The honor and honesty of a candidate should always be considered and explored because without those nothing else the candidate tells us can have any meaning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Wed Mar 26 18:07:07 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:07:07 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> Given the massive amounts of energy, expense and complications required to get people out of the gravity well, maybe we would be better off skipping propulsion altogether and moving on to transporter technology. After all, the reason Star Trek used them was because faking the landing and take off of a spacecraft on each planet was just too complicated and expensive. :-) Keith Henson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > >> Keith wrote >> >> > The unobtainium part of the space elevator is the cable. There are >> > persistent rumors that the University of Cambridge has demonstrated 20 >> > GPa nanotube yarn, the report has been expected to be published in >> > science for a few months, but nothing has happened. Even 20 GPa isn't >> > strong enough, but it's getting there. >> >> I've never looked into this or studied it at all. But what about this? >> Just as we launch today's spaceships from the bottom of a big >> airliner or a B52, why not tether the lower end to the highest >> flying dirigible we can find? Cable still too heavy? >> > > Think about it. The highest you can go with a balloon is about > 100,000 feet. That's 20 miles out of 22,000. > > The Wikipedia article has the space elevator math worked out. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 17:06:54 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:06:54 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <014c01c88f63$cbe49a70$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Kevin Freels> to time. I should be able to design the thing on my computer and just > print my new rooms with a giant ink-jet; power and plumbing integrated > just like an IC chip. Or at least build a house with giant lego-like prefabricated modules with plug-in wiring and pipes. Houses should vave structured cabling so I decide what to plug at any spot, a light source, a tv, a computer, a phone, whatever. Or better yet, everything wireless. Off course, you can't make water wireless :-), but the prefabricated tiles should come with standard water conduits so when you assemble them water should be present in every tile. Kevin> Real travel in the future will likely be an unnecessary luxury. I hope it will become optional rather than unecessary. Funny thing is we have been through a big revolution in telecommunications and nothing even close happened with transportation. We have even less means of transportation today than we used to have before (where is my dirigible?) and the promises are just promises. Kevin> I couldn't quite figure out the purpose of the domes. I have often seen > these in sci-fi and future predictions but to what end I have no idea. > If the reason was because the air outside the domes was too terrible to > bear, I would think that this failed prediction is a good thing. Let's > hope we can always refrain from putting domes over our cities. Considering that the air is much worse inside a city than outside, domes could be a good way to create some sort of climate control. And also, where's our undersea colonies? Domed, if you please. From jonkc at att.net Wed Mar 26 17:28:56 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:28:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can References: <032620081502.8720.47EA65980008BB7F000022102200750784979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <064f01c88f66$ebb82850$3bef4d0c@MyComputer> aiguy at comcast.net > any man who would be so hypocritical, deceitful, dishonest, and > manipulative as to pretend to believe in a religion just to get get > elected would be the last person I would ever want to see elected > into the highest office of this land. No human being has ever attained political office in this or any other country without being hypocritical, deceitful, dishonest, and manipulative; but that's OK, I'll take hypocrisy over stupidity any day and Christianity is STUPID! > The practical requirement to stay with a church in order to get > elected is a byproduct or the wishes of the majority. So what? If 51% voted to kill the other 49% would you have no objections? > How would you know to vote for him? You wouldn't, that one reason elections are a poor way to make your wishes known. > When we reduce an election to a popularity contest [...] When they are? Elections have always been popularity contests and always will be. > we are abusing the very democracy and freedom to choose who will > govern us. Could be, but then I'm not really a huge fan of democracy. John K Clark From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 26 17:41:50 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:41:50 -0600 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion Message-ID: John K Clark jonkc at att.net : >Right know there are hundreds, probably thousands of tons of Plutonium >on the planet, Please tell NASA where they are located, because presently they have enough only for the RTGS of about one more outer solar system mission. http://www.space.com/news/080306-nasa-plutonium-shortage-fin.html NASA is planning to go around to the DOE centers collecting what they can find. Russia is selling NASA some, selling the Indians some, then the Russians say they have no more (uh huh ;-) ). Presently, a highly possible result of the end of the Cold War is that the robotic exploration of the outer solar system exploration might be ended (or at least slowed down) as well. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 18:07:54 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:07:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can In-Reply-To: <032620081654.16956.47EA7FCF000BD16A0000423C2206424613979A09070E@comcast.net> References: <032620081654.16956.47EA7FCF000BD16A0000423C2206424613979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <580930c20803261107w6aceb60dq5e923e2e154573d4@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:54 PM, wrote: > My Reponse: > > The practical requirement to stay with a church in order to get elected is > > > a byproduct or the wishes of the majority. And the will of the majority > and their > > right to vote for a candidate they are comfortable with is what demcarcy > is all about. > > Sure. I happen to select my employees, as it is my right. Candidates are selected through majority votes, as it is the people rights. Neither scenario tell us if my human resources selection process or the democratic election process actually pick the right people in a given circumstance, or prevent independent observers (say, a consultant) from criticising the way the exercise of the right was directed. :-) The honor and honesty of a candidate should always be considered and > explored because > > without those nothing else the candidate tells us can have any meaning. > > There again, taking your previous statement at face value, shouldn't be the majority to decide about that? The truth is that there is much worse than dishonesty, as much as we may find it disgusting in a politician (and I certainly do). Well-intentioned stupids, e.g., are at least as dangerous; and I not only respect, but find plausible, the fact that people are often ready to accept a modicum of disingenousness if the alternative is crazy fundamentalism or utter incompetence. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Mar 26 18:11:50 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:11:50 +0000 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion Message-ID: <032620081811.14923.47EA91E6000D078800003A4B2206424613979A09070E@comcast.net> Amara said: > > Please tell NASA where they are located, because presently they have > enough only for the RTGS of about one more outer solar system mission. > > http://www.space.com/news/080306-nasa-plutonium-shortage-fin.html > > NASA is planning to go around to the DOE centers collecting what they > can find. Russia is selling NASA some, selling the Indians some, then > the Russians say they have no more (uh huh ;-) ). > > Presently, a highly possible result of the end of the Cold War is that > the robotic exploration of the outer solar system exploration might be > ended (or at least slowed down) as well. > My understanding is that the nuclear warheads only have a certain shelf life before the half-life of the nuclear warheads becomes degraded enough that it has to be replaced. Which means that all nuclear powers must still keep multiple nuclear enrichment facilites online to replenish their allowed stockpile under the nuclear treaties. These are enrichment centers are located on DOE reservations and are probably limited and monitored by nuclear proliferation treaties as to how much they produce. But there is no reason that we could not go to the Russian's and other countries we have treaties with and ask them to send monitors and authorize the increased production for specific solar missions. The production capacity is already there. NASA probably also does not have access to DOD inventories. These inventories though are the one's limited by treaties. The reason we buy as much Russion material as possible is to keep it off of the black market. A rogue nuke driven into the country's capital on the back of a pickup truck is an attack for which there is no defense. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 18:23:06 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:23:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics a theory or belief? Message-ID: <8CA5D8592345BE2-7C4-695@webmail-nb06.sysops.aol.com> Bret wrote: "Hi Terry, it works currently, but in a scaled fashion. Entire "humans" are stored in liquid nitrogen, as embryos. We (species we) have also managed to vitrify entire organs that have emerged in a functioning state and have been installed in humans as donor organs. There is a great deal of information about low temperature experimentation in living humans and animals for surgical purposes, and work is being done to cryonically store larger and more complex systems using improved formulae all the time. So this is entirely a theoretical pursuit with escalating experimentation within the scientific method. It is not a dream/belief. A list of independent scientific journal articles, hosted on the Alcor website: http://www.alcor.org/sciencerefs.html Science FAQ: http://www.alcor.org/sciencefaq.htm ___________ Thanks Bret for your above post and for giving the website for alcor.org which I'll try to read asap. I'm aware of what's going on in embryonic cell research and some organ transplant. > My reply: Its neither you nor not you for there's no permanent person > to be identified as change occurs moment to moment in the death of > cells from a biological process during the interchange of oxygen and > carbon dioxide. The intercellular system is not a person but a > biological process among a lot of complex organ system such as brain > and its supporting structures. What is a person? Its a conventional > way > of identifying an individual by social standard/culture using > ideas/thoughts/memes. ________ Bret: "Are you still you after a heart transplant? If the intercellular system, the whole she-bang, is halted, and then restored in an undamaged state, is it still you? Until we prove otherwise, there isn't any real scientific evidence to suggest that transplantation of anything other than the brain would change "you-ness". Therefore, if the above systemic experimentation continues to yield positive results, at the rate it has in the past twenty years, and medical instrumentation continues to increase in resolution and capacity, I would say cryonics will yield its first "real" success in approximately 180 years, barring any major leap. Just look at Moore's Law" ___________ I read an abstract of Moore's Law which is now obsolete according to some study which is not applicable in economics and social problems globally. I'll get back to you about that. In connection with your question above "Are you still you after a heart transplant?" In macro scale what took place is a change from one donor to the receipient. I read a case of some heart transplant in which the receipient feeling a tad confused about some feelings that triggers the memory of some experience which only occured on the donor's life but not on the person who gets the transplant. It was found out that heart cells also carry memories for some cells somehow resemble some of the neurons of the nervous system. In micro scale there is no change for the heart beats with the interchange between calcium and potassium ions in the muscles. There is no such thing as a you-ness or I-ness in that process involved in micro scale. As I said in my previews posts, memes are acquired not embedded in the genes. In a larger scale like heart transplant, cronics working with science in that instant is not a belief but a theory. Terry From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 26 19:01:18 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:01:18 -0600 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion Message-ID: aiguy at comcast.net aiguy at comcast.net : >My understanding is that the nuclear warheads only have a certain shelf >life before the half-life of the nuclear warheads becomes degraded >enough that it has to be replaced. Reference, please. (Plutonium-238 half-life = 87 years) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium-238 >But there is no reason that we could not go to the Russian's They have (what NASA has currently is from the Russians) and they did. New Horizons to Pluto has Russian plutonium in its RTGs, for example. Russia is the primary source today, and the Russians say they are almost out (except for that bit they sold to the Indian Space Agency ;-)). FWIW, what I wrote previously came directly from the mouth of NASA Associate Administrator 5 days ago. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 19:03:13 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:03:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 Message-ID: <8CA5D8B2CC4057F-7C4-9DD@webmail-nb06.sysops.aol.com> ""He missed the hours a day that 2008 people spend on 'so-called' communicating. It is now essential to keep all your friends constantly informed as to where you are, where you are going to and what you are doing / thinking. And discussing where other friends are and what they are doing. When did it become essential to be constantly chatting / emailing / texting / IMing / blogging to some invisible companion(s), no matter what else you are supposed to be doing? Nobody thinks any more. We have become a civilization of gossips. BillK ____________ The changes that occured in decades cannot be accurately predicted like the weather. Even the weather changes moment to moment and the most we can do is give an approximate prediction for instance- whether a volcano will erupt or an earthquake will occur in some approximate time or date depending on the instrument's level of functioning. Brains and machine can malfunction any time. Ever heard of Murphy's law? Terry From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 19:23:47 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:23:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] An Abstract from Moore's Law by LIkka Tuomi Message-ID: <8CA5D8E0C37CFDF-7C4-B6F@webmail-nb06.sysops.aol.com> " Moore's Law gave us a compact and a deceptively exact way to express beliefs in technological determinism. Later it became transformed to economic determinism, which argued that people would buy computers because they will be ridiculously cheap. Moore's Law also provided a convincing basis for arguing that the development of economies and societies is at the hands of technical experts. The fact that Moore's Law has so often been misrepresented and used together with contradictory evidence indicates that it has expressed strong and fundamental convictions about the nature of progress. Contrary to what its users have often claimed to say - that the history of semiconductors and computing has followed a well-defined exponential path - the rhetoric point of Moore's Law has been directed towards the future, determined by technological development and understood by the speaker. Gordon Moore obviously was right in predicting that the complexity of semiconductors would grow rapidly and that silicon chips would become economically and socially extremely important. Indeed, his 1965 analysis of the dynamics of integrated circuit industry contained key insights that made semiconductor industry what it is today. In a way his prediction, however, was too successful. It allowed technologists, economists, and politicians to neglect important factors that have been driving social, technical, and economic development during the last decades. Although the increasing use of computing technology has made people more aware of, for example, social, cultural, organizational, political, ethical, and cognitive issues related to information processing, physics is still commonly seen as the hard core of future developments. As a result, many discussions on the future of Moore's Law have focused on physical limits. In recent years economic considerations have gained legitimacy also in this context, partly because Moore himself has frequently predicted that the increases in chip complexity will not be limited by physics but by the exponentially increasing costs of manufacturing plants. As computing technology becomes increasingly pervasive, we eventually have to ask what benefits it actually brings. Fundamentally, this question can only be answered in a theoretical framework that is able to define development. In theory, there are many different ways to approach this question, both old and new. It should, however, be clear that development cannot be reduced to shrinking line-widths, maximum number of components on a chip, or minimal manufacturing costs. Indeed, one of the paradoxes of the information society is that we still have very limited understanding on how to link technical advance and development. Partly this is because technical advances have simply been defined as development. This exaggerated and somewhat limited focus on technical advances has produced a wide variety of extensions to Moore's Law, eventually pushing it far beyond its original scope and available evidence. In the process, some of the kinks in historical evolution have been eliminated and scientific facts have been created when needed. True innovation, however, is not predictable. It requires that we remember our history so that we are not doomed to repeat it." About the Author Ilkka Tuomi is currently Visiting Scientist at the European Commission's Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville, Spain. From 1987 to 2001 he worked at the Nokia Research Center in various positions, most recently as Principal Scientist, Information Society and Knowledge Management. From June 1999 to December 2000, he was Visiting Scholar at the University of California, Berkeley. E-mail: ilkka.tuomi at jrc.es From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 26 19:28:07 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:28:07 -0600 Subject: [ExI] NASA Associate Administrator Stern resigns Message-ID: Wow. How depressing. Alan is the primary reason I'm in the US/Boulder now. And whatever is the reason, it came to a head quickly. When he was in Boulder last week for the New Horizons meetings, he gave no indication that anything was amiss 'enough' to leave. He used words to the contrary (looking ahead to the next two years), in fact. And NASA Chief Scientist John Mather (shared Nobel Prize for Physics last year) is also leaving (rumor from NASA Watch). Amara ---------------------------------------------------------------- Weiler to Replace Stern as NASA Science Chief By Brian Berger Space News Staff Writer posted: 26 March 2008 11:20 am ET This story was updated 11:35 a.m. EDT. WASHINGTON ? NASA is recalling Goddard Space Flight Center Director Ed Weiler to the U.S. space agency's headquarters here to take over the Science Mission Directorate in the wake of Alan Stern's resignation. Stern, a seasoned planetary scientist who joined NASA in April 2007 to pursue a reform-minded agenda, informed colleagues in an e-mail March 26 that he would be leaving the agency in the month ahead. In his e-mail, which he sent out at 8:34 a.m., according to the time stamp, Stern said that he offered his resignation March 25 and that NASA Administrator Mike Griffin "reluctantly accepted" it. "I will remain at NASA for a few weeks," Stern wrote. "It's been my privilege to serve the NASA and scientific community and to work with you." "I also want you to know," Stern continued, "that Mike and I remain on good terms. He remains in my eyes the best administrator NASA has ever had." In a statement, Griffin commended Stern for his service and announced that Weiler, who served as NASA's space science chief from 1998 to 2004, would replace Stern on an interim basis. "Alan has rendered invaluable service to NASA as the Principal Investigator for the Pluto/New Horizons mission, as a member of the NASA Advisory Council, and as the associate administrator of the Science Mission Directorate," Griffin said. "While I deeply regret his decision to leave NASA, I understand his reasons for doing so, and wish him all the best in his future endeavors." -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 19:40:06 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:40:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Sam Harris Can Message-ID: <8CA5D90541D49E4-7C4-CA0@webmail-nb06.sysops.aol.com> "From: "Stefano Vaj" said: > I beg to differ. I am not a US citizen, but I believe that the > pratical requirement to stay with one's church, or at least with *a* > church, any church, reflects more badly on the society that imposes it > that on the candidate that has to conform with such expectation if he > wants to have a chance. > > Moreover, as much as I hate hypocrisy and dishonesty, I would live > with it any day if the alternative were not just somebody who bows and > defers to the superstitions and beliefs concerned for the sake of > being elected, but somebody who even actually *believes* in them... AiGuy Reponse: The practical requirement to stay with a church in order to get elected is a byproduct or the wishes of the majority. And the will of the majority and their right to vote for a candidate they are comfortable with is what demcarcy is all about. So assuming your hypothetical candidate was willing to lie about his faith and religious affiliation. How would you know to vote for him? How could you believe his stance on any other issues which were important to you, because he could be lieing about those as well. When we reduce an election to a popularity contest on who has more charisma , is a better speaker and tells the majority whatever they believe the majority wants to hear then we are abusing the very democracy and freedom to choose who will govern us. The honor and honesty of a candidate should always be considered and explored because without those nothing else the candidate tells us can have any meaning. -------------- next part -------------- Amen to all of the above. Does the end [the white house} justify the means? Only Obama could answer if he is honest or not. But the fact he admitted he was with the church for twenty years, practicing its tenets as a faithful member cause intensive/stressful psychological states bordering on entropy [madness] on his part and on the voters who listen with emotional rather than rational behavior. No I would not vote for Obama whatever the polls say. Terry From jrd1415 at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 20:07:43 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:07:43 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: <200803251751.55860.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <675801c88e96$c30ee130$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803251751.55860.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the response Bryan. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Jeff Davis wrote: > > ...different idea. An inflated structure -- > > dome or tube or ramp-like thingie -- with the topmost part up there > > above the hundred mile mark. > > I did the calculations for this scenario. Things are not favorable. Have > you thought about using water instead? I'm confused. You're joshin' me, right? I like that. I'll take one order of whimsy on wry. > > Mum's the word, mostly. > > You are cruel: why share a good idea and ask us not to implement it? Because I'm a dreadful tease? Because nothing is so desirable as forbidden fruit? Because nothing wants telling more than a secret? To provoke curiosity? But you've convinced me to reform. Implement away. From citta437 at aol.com Wed Mar 26 22:30:36 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:30:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] When Is Dead Really Dead? Message-ID: <8CA5DA825827579-4D0-402@webmail-ne07.sysops.aol.com> "Pro/con ethics debate: when is dead really dead? Whetstine L, Streat S, Darwin M, Crippen D. Health Care Ethics Center, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA 15282, USA. lwhets6623 at aol.com 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. PMID: 16356234 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] _____________ I was a registered nurse working in ICU in a private {Catholic} hospital where death is determined by irreversibility of consciousness after all the organ system stopped functioning not on the availability of organ transplant at the time. A patient on life support may no longer have brain function as shown by the brain monitor. When the relatives/guardian and the attending doctor agree on discontinuing the life support machines after the heart or the brain both failed to function then our culture ethically consider the patient is clinically dead. The standard procedure in most hospital consider the physical manifestation of death are rigor mortis, no heart beat and loss of breathing function along with the objective assessment of the medical team. On another note, some patients who are waiting for organ transplant i.e. kidney transplant are still conscious and have their vital signs stable are considered good candidates for kidney transplant. In some cases the younger and wealthier the patient, their chances are better than the aged whose brain function have deteriorated and cannot have any brain transplant. The cost of an ICU stay is astronomical but that is not a factor. BTW, has anyone heard about Israel prime minister, Ariel Sharon, who has been on coma for how long? Why is he kept on life support for so long because he is a head of state? Terry From aiguy at comcast.net Wed Mar 26 23:02:11 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:02:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00b601c88f95$6fce4fb0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Amara asked for a reference aiguy at comcast.net aiguy at comcast.net : >My understanding is that the nuclear warheads only have a certain shelf >life before the half-life of the nuclear warheads becomes degraded >enough that it has to be replaced. According to this article our nuclear arsenal is one year from it's expiration date. Does anyone here really think that we are not replacing our warheads but rather will just let them decay until they no longer work? Reference, please. My Response: According to this article from the Los Alamos National Laboratory (DOE Facility) our nuclear arsenal was one year from it's expiration date in Fall 2002 the date of the page's property. That means our arsenal expired it's shelf life 9 years ago. Does anyone here really think that we are not replacing our warheads but rather will just let them decay until they all no longer work? This article also claims that no new warheads have been made for 10 years but I am will to bet that even if this is true that a classified program is in place to recharge the existing warheads with newly refined Uranium to insure that the United States still has a proven Nuclear deterrent. The second link is a congressonal report showing that as of 2006 we are still developing more efficient processes for recycling Uranium from spent nuclear fuel. It may be that we were so overstockpiled during the cold war that all we need to do now is reprocess (re-enrich) from existing warheads. http://www.lanl.gov/quarterly/q_w03/shelf_life.shtml http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS22542.pdf "Old Uranium Uranium is the main heavy metal used in a weapon's "rad case" to redirect the x-ray radiation produced by the weapon's fission primary. It is also sometimes used in other weapon parts. Uranium and its alloys age in several ways. Like steel, pure uranium "rusts" when exposed to the oxygen in air. It is also corroded by hydrogen. Although nuclear warheads are sealed in airtight metal containers to reduce oxidation and corrosion, the high explosives, plastics, and other organic materials also in the container emit tiny amounts of oxygen, hydrogen, and water vapor that, over time, can cause problems. Uranium alloys also change their crystal structures, or phases, over time, which also presents aging problems. Materials scientists manufacture a part to have a specific phase in order to optimize its strength, density, or corrosion resistance. However, the strain a part accumulates during fabrication and the temperature variations a weapon experiences in the field can, over time, change the phase, thereby degrading a part's properties. Subjected to the considerable heat given off by a weapon's radioactive plutonium, for example, a uranium part-and all other weapon parts-can reach temperatures as high as 40?C (about 100?F). A weapon can also experience temperature extremes in its storage environment, such as a desert. Temperature-induced phase changes that degrade uranium's mechanical properties are a major concern." No new nuclear weapons have been produced in this country in 10 years. In fact, the average age of a stockpile weapon is now 19 years, and some of the weapons are over 35 years old. The nation's nuclear weapons were originally designed to last for 20 to 25 years. Each year, the directors of the Department of Energy's three nuclear weapons labs must certify that the stockpile weapons will perform as designed. If the performance of an older weapon becomes questionable, lab scientists must decide how to replace its aging parts in order to restore its peak performance. From amara at amara.com Wed Mar 26 23:19:58 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:19:58 -0600 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion Message-ID: I was referring to Plutonium-238. Amara From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 23:27:15 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:27:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <200803251751.55860.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803261827.15532.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Jeff Davis wrote: > > ?> ?...different idea. ?An inflated structure -- > > ?> dome or tube or ramp-like thingie -- with the topmost part up > > > there above the hundred mile mark. > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > > > ?I did the calculations for this scenario. Things are not > > favorable. Have you thought about using water instead? > > I'm confused. ?You're joshin' ?me, right? ?I like that. ?I'll take > one order of whimsy on wry. Huh? I did the calculations and it looked like with inflation -- as in, adding in gases -- you would get stratification and at some point the dome would collapse because at that scale you have to calculate in gravitational effects. And then you have to maintain the heat and so on. Otherwise the gas will cool, especially at the upper parts of the dome. Not good. It may be interesting to make another structure following Buck Fuller's work, maybe we can have a structure that can get enough support struts down to the ground. Otherwise you get compressed cement or concrete and you're back to the requirements of CNT as in the space elevator case. So, water might work, maybe an inflatable foam, compressed in high-density synthesis or something. - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 23:28:21 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:28:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator In-Reply-To: <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Kevin Freels wrote: > Given the massive amounts of energy, expense and complications > required to get people out of the gravity well, maybe we would be > better off skipping propulsion altogether and moving on to > transporter technology. Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 23:33:01 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:33:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Kevin Freels wrote: > I have been working on a complete tear down and rebuild of my home > for several years and sometimes it just amazes me how archaic the > processes are and how much technology goes into them. I have > high-tech lithium-ion powered framing nailers, a laser sliding mitre > saw, and an insulation blower but still what I am resorting to is > sticking shaped trees together with metal pins and cramming stuffing > into the middle to hold in the warmth. Even worse is the need to > thread the entire structure with pipes and wires. As much fun as I > have with the framing nailer I can't help but to be a bit > disappointed in my fancy log cabin from time to time. I should be > able to design the thing on my computer and just print my new rooms > with a giant ink-jet; power and plumbing integrated just like an IC > chip. Kevin, how about we design that sort of giant "inkjet" printer and publish the information on the internet, so that hopefully somebody could implement it should the opportunity arise. Obviously printable shelter is an important step in making sure we don't randomly die from weather and so on. I am sure that others have come up with interesting ways of designing houses. I remember Buck Fuller came up with the domes that you mention later in your message, in particular he had a few ideas for cheap, manufactured houses that are still on display in the Ford museums, made of the same metals as Boeings and other aircraft. But it never caught on for some reason. A modular design is possible, I don't see why we can't do this on our own. - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 23:38:17 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:08:17 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803261638q3c48343cu38227a2cb1d43c47@mail.gmail.com> There was a lot of media buzz about "contour crafting" a few years ago (basically, a big printer that deposits concrete). eg: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4764-robot-builder-could-print-houses.html Here's the guy's site: http://www.contourcrafting.org/ -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com On 27/03/2008, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Kevin Freels wrote: > > I have been working on a complete tear down and rebuild of my home > > for several years and sometimes it just amazes me how archaic the > > processes are and how much technology goes into them. I have > > high-tech lithium-ion powered framing nailers, a laser sliding mitre > > saw, and an insulation blower but still what I am resorting to is > > sticking shaped trees together with metal pins and cramming stuffing > > into the middle to hold in the warmth. Even worse is the need to > > thread the entire structure with pipes and wires. As much fun as I > > have with the framing nailer I can't help but to be a bit > > disappointed in my fancy log cabin from time to time. I should be > > able to design the thing on my computer and just print my new rooms > > with a giant ink-jet; power and plumbing integrated just like an IC > > chip. > > Kevin, how about we design that sort of giant "inkjet" printer and > publish the information on the internet, so that hopefully somebody > could implement it should the opportunity arise. Obviously printable > shelter is an important step in making sure we don't randomly die from > weather and so on. I am sure that others have come up with interesting > ways of designing houses. > > I remember Buck Fuller came up with the domes that you mention later in > your message, in particular he had a few ideas for cheap, manufactured > houses that are still on display in the Ford museums, made of the same > metals as Boeings and other aircraft. But it never caught on for some > reason. A modular design is possible, I don't see why we can't do this > on our own. > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 27 00:02:38 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:02:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00c301c88f9d$df70acc0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Amara said: >> I was referring to Plutonium-238. My Response: As per Wikipedia... Plutonium 238 prepared by irradiating neptunium 237 which is created in nuclear reactors. It is then recovered during the process of reprocessing nuclear fuel which we are doing anyway! According to Wikipedia each light water reactor is capable of producing 700 grams per 3 years. We reprocess the fuels from these reactors anyway to recover the Uranium 235 (enriched to 3 percent) and Plutonium 239. Each of our Nuclear submarines have one of these light water reactors (LWR). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_water_reactor These must be reactors must each be refueled by 25% every 12 to 18 months. As well as many commercial light-water reactors whose fuel must be reprocessed on a regular basis. So where is all the neptunium 237 going? As valuable as it is I doubt the governments are throwing it away. My guess is it may be being diverted during reprocessing for use in classified DOD military satellites. Also according to Wikipedia as of 2004 the government may be stockpiling it in Nevada! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium-238 Today, Plutonium 238 is usually prepared by the irradiation of neptunium 237, a minor actinide produced in nuclear reactors, that can be recovered from spent nuclear fuel during reprocessing, or by the irradiation of americium in a reactor. In both cases, the targets are subjected to a chemical treatment, including dissolution in nitric acid to extract the plutonium-238. A 100kg sample of light water reactor fuel that has been irradiated for three years contains only about 700 grams of neptunium 237, and the neptunium must be extracted selectively. The United States currently has limited facilities to produce plutonium-238. Since 1993, the U.S. has purchased all of the plutonium-238 it has used in space probes from Russia. 16.5 kilograms total have been purchased.[1] From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 27 00:15:19 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:15:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Bryan asked: >> Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? My Response: Yes, but only on a small basis. 1. Go to an existing (already polluted) underground Atomic test site. 2. Plant geothermal generators in the desert (molten salt?) 3. Drill a central shaft and detonate an underground nuclear device deep enough to prevent further topside irradiation. 4. Use the geothermal generators to mine the heat from underground magma ball created by the blast converting it to electricity. 5. When power levels begin to drop repeat step 3 as required. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 00:33:06 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:03:06 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> On 27/03/2008, Gary Miller wrote: > Bryan asked: > > >> Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? > > My Response: > > Yes, but only on a small basis. > I think Bryan was thinking laterally about this pesky gravity well we are at the bottom of. Personally, I like it. Replace the old mudball with a bunch of free floating habitats, plenty of room for all and sundry, and most of the materials of the planet left to play with. You might not even need to blow it up much. Just crack it into a bunch of smaller pieces, until none has enough gravity on its own to be a nuisance. Some might be helpful, though, maybe there's an optimum sized chunk? Possibly it's been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt Dinosaurs? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From citta437 at aol.com Thu Mar 27 00:51:45 2008 From: citta437 at aol.com (citta437 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:51:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] "Realistic" Scenario for Nanotech Repair of the Frozen Human Brain Message-ID: <8CA5DBBDD84F1AC-4D0-11C8@webmail-ne07.sysops.aol.com> Reprinted from Cryonics Alcor Life ExtensionFoundation Snip "Once the patient has been restored to a state approaching perfect physical health, consciousness is restored." Summary and Conclusion A "realistic" scenario for the repair of the frozen brain is proposed. It is based on the specific details of freezing injury and on the natural resistance of most cellular constituents to freezing damage, as well as on the natural self-assembly and self-repair of living cells. It avoids the need for performing chemical reactions below the glass transition temperature while at the same time avoiding the problems of diffusive information loss on warming. Although each step has not yet been subjected to thorough analysis, each is concrete and based on known fact. The scenario is fully open to criticism, testing, and refinement. It thus could serve as a basis for future discussions of the feasibility of moderate approaches to the restoration of those frozen by today's technology. Disclaimer This scenario is predicated on many assumptions--such as the assumption of adequate preservation by current technology-that may be false. This scenario does not prove that cryonics can or will succeed. It may, however, facilitate discussion of that possibility." __________ The article is too long to post the complete details of the procedure to repair a human brain. What I want to know why it was not done on a monkey's brain first since Alcor started the experiment on organ cells for decades? Usually experiments are done on guinea pigs first and then if the experiment is a success the media would announce it to the public but I have not heard anything yet so does it mean the experiment was not a success? Terry From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Mar 27 00:27:59 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Red Tides of Neptune? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <83717.95254.qm@web65410.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ---Stuart wrote: >>Compare the pictures. >> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/display.cfm?IM_ID=2565 >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Coccolithophore_bloom.jpg --- Amara Graps wrote: > Stuart: You'll need to dig up the color table for those images > (suggestion: > go to the 2003 Icarus paper to which that the PR refers. Planetary > data is usually spectrally coded, so that green represents a > wavelength > region. I doubt that green corresponds to what you are accustomed to > seeing in visual wavelengths. You were right, Amara. The HST picture is falsely colored. I followed your suggestion and looked up the color table. The color table is as follows: blue=467nm (visible blue), green=673nm (visible red), red=850nm-1000nm (invisible IR). So I read the paper and and fooled around with the pictures in photoshop looking at the RGB channel intensities for various pixels on the picture. For the most part, Stormovsky et. al. were right the overall albedo of Neptune is increasing. That is on average, Neptune is growing brighter for all three wavelengths that they tested. However they don't talk much about local irregularities one of which is the falsely green-colored belt at ~60 degrees S latitude. Now the green channel intensity is a measure of the amount of red light being reflected from Neptune. Most places on the planet look falsesly colored shades of blue. This is because blue light, red light, and IR light is being reflected back into space at various intensities. This means that there will be subtle areas in the false color map of magenta (deficit of green channel) and cyan (deficit of red channel) mixed in with the blue channel to form the aquamarine of the overall picture. There will also be bright white areas corresponding to reflection of all three wavelengths balancing the all three of the RGB channels. Cirrus type ice crystal clouds tend to do that on earth too which is why the look so bright from space. What this means is that the "green belt" is actually a red belt where almost all of the blue and IR is being absorbed by something while red light is reflected. Now most plants on earth are green because the chlorophylls (A & B) absorb light roughly in the 450 nm and 650 nm regions. The spectral region between these absorption maxima are "waste light" and are thus reflected. So the fact that the "green belt" is actually red, rules out normal cholorphyll-based photosynthesis and green plants/green algae since their cholorphyll would absorb the red. Bacterial chlorophylls are different a different story however, in that they absorb light in the 800nm-1000nm region. Furthermore microbes are incredibly diverse in their arsenal of survival genes. Many like the red algae and purple bacteria use carotenoids as a "light antenna" to absorb longer wavengths and transfer the energy to chlorophyll. A common example of this is the red tide phenomenon which is a bloom of dinoflagellates or other red algae. Take the genus of bacteria called Rhodobacter. http://www.nature.com/emboj/journal/v18/n3/full/7591488a.html They can facultatively use carotene and bacteriochloryphyll to anaerobically perform photosynthesis in anoxic environments. Their absorptions peak right around blue 470nm and infrared 890nm. See figure 2. Rhodobacter has an unusually broad range of metabolism. The most studied species Rhodobacter sphaeroides, possesses a very versatile metabolism which include heterotrophy (eating organic matter) photosynthesis (eating light), lithotrophy (eating non-organic matter), and is a facultative breather. It has both aerobic and anaerobic respiration and can live with or without oxygen. It can also fix nitrogen and synthesize tetrapyrroles, chlorophylls, heme, and vitamin B12. It's like the SUV of bacteria. Furthermore there is a related species called Rhodospirillum centenum that forms cysts. Cysts are almost as hardy as the endospores but are larger and consist of a "four-pack" of bacterial cells. http://www.bio.indiana.edu/~bauerlab/cystformation.html Yet another related species is Rhodoferax antarcticus. It is a psychrophile an extremophile that loves the cold. It can grow at O degrees celsius. http://www.science.siu.edu/microbiology/extremophiles/grant_proposal.html So taking your suggestion didn't eliminate the possibility of the red belt being a bacterial bloom on Neptune, but it did narrow down the number of possible species. Of course there could be another explanation why a narrow belt in the southern hemisphere of Neptune would reflect red light but absorb blue and infra-red. At the very least there seems to be some interesting chemistry going on in a strangely localized area of the planet. I am completely open to other explanations. Anyone got any? Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 27 01:00:48 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:00:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.co m> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080326195930.04f1be00@satx.rr.com> At 11:03 AM 3/27/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >Replace the old mudball with a bunch of free >floating habitats, plenty of room for all and sundry, and most of the >materials of the planet left to play with. > >You might not even need to blow it up much. Just crack it into a bunch >of smaller pieces, until none has enough gravity on its own to be a >nuisance. I think it'd stick itself back together after a while, as it did the first time. But without the volatiles maybe. Damien Broderick From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 01:14:43 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:14:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Emlyn wrote: > Personally, I like it. Replace the old mudball with a bunch of free > floating habitats, plenty of room for all and sundry, and most of the > materials of the planet left to play with. Yes, but what about the damage in the mean time? I am thinking that we could possibly use dome-like environments to keep the biosphere in tact, with trade occuring between the different domes in our pathetic attempt at making sure everything stays alive. Also we *must* prevent water loss. And atmospheric loss. Oxygen is very, very useful. > You might not even need to blow it up much. Just crack it into a > bunch of smaller pieces, until none has enough gravity on its own to > be a nuisance. Some might be helpful, though, maybe there's an > optimum sized chunk? I had the unfortunate experience of reading through Tides of Light recently. In it, a cybernetic pseudopodia organism plays with a hu and throws him down a giant shaft straight through the center of a planet. He picks up lots and lots of velocity. Could be a useful effect. So the gravity well might still be of some use yet ... think of it as the classic Star Trek slingshot maneuver, but within the planet. - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 01:29:44 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:59:44 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803261829i6d5d68a4o246d41c7046e439d@mail.gmail.com> > I had the unfortunate experience of reading through Tides of Light > recently. In it, a cybernetic pseudopodia organism plays with a hu and > throws him down a giant shaft straight through the center of a planet. > He picks up lots and lots of velocity. Could be a useful effect. So the > gravity well might still be of some use yet ... think of it as the > classic Star Trek slingshot maneuver, but within the planet. > > - Bryan Wouldn't he come out at the same velocity at which he went in? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 01:32:38 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:02:38 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080326195930.04f1be00@satx.rr.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <710b78fc0803261733v7660a2c5r8e430a7a855b5da6@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080326195930.04f1be00@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803261832h799edebehdd2ea19093fe9e98@mail.gmail.com> On 27/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 11:03 AM 3/27/2008 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > > >Replace the old mudball with a bunch of free > >floating habitats, plenty of room for all and sundry, and most of the > >materials of the planet left to play with. > > > >You might not even need to blow it up much. Just crack it into a bunch > >of smaller pieces, until none has enough gravity on its own to be a > >nuisance. > > I think it'd stick itself back together after a while, as it did the > first time. But without the volatiles maybe. > > Damien Broderick Maybe you could spread the bits evenly throughout the orbital path? I see that people think the main belt is pretty much just gathered debris, but with some puzzling chemical composition. Would it make more sense if you assumed it had been mined for something in the past? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 01:57:50 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:57:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803261829i6d5d68a4o246d41c7046e439d@mail.gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> <710b78fc0803261829i6d5d68a4o246d41c7046e439d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803262057.50454.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Emlyn wrote: > Wouldn't he come out at the same velocity at which he went in? You're not perfectly spherical any more, though. You blew it up. - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 27 02:11:59 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:11:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <200803262057.50454.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> <710b78fc0803261829i6d5d68a4o246d41c7046e439d@mail.gmail.com> <200803262057.50454.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080326210848.023c4048@satx.rr.com> At 08:57 PM 3/26/2008 -0500, Bryan wrote: >You're not perfectly spherical any more, though. I've met Emlyn, in fact we've been on TV together. He's never been perfectly spherical. Not even approximately spherical. Damien Broderick From ferox314 at gmail.com Wed Mar 26 20:09:18 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:09:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803261309r491de60as63b217cd142316b6@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Emlyn wrote: > http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/24/what-will-life-be-like-in-the-year-2008/ > > Really, a pretty damned good shot with a lot of those predictions. And > the stuff thats wrong, well, in a lot of cases it damns us more than > damns the writer. Most of it should exist. Why doesn't it? We seem to > have spent decades on frippery, as far as I can see. Great technology, > pity about the application... There's a great blog called Paleo-Future [http://www.paleofuture.com/] which is devoted entirely to illustrating past predictions of what life what be like today. J From ferox314 at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 01:50:48 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:50:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803261850k3f4957ceye4d6af863b83e57b@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: Interesting bit about domes covering cities in that article. People tend to overestimate how wealthy we'll be in the future. Yes, climate-controlled domes that cover cities are technically possible today, but they are financially infeasible. I wonder what they expected the per capita GDP to be 40 years into the future. Or maybe they assumed fabrication technology would be absurdly cheap. That's a thermodynamic/energy problem. Either way, neither has happened. But this illustrates the two main trajectories that get overestimated: finances and thermodynamics. For this reason I'm not too worried about a grey goo accident, and I wonder about the large scale feasibility of nanotechnology in general. You need raw material, namely reduced hydrocarbons. Those stores are quickly running out. The cost of ethane/ethene will follow that of benzene. Maybe we can convert CO2, but that will be costly as well. Oxidation of hydrocarbons is thermodynamically probable -- just look how much energy we extract during combustion. The reverse reaction will consume energy. I think in the end finding a sufficient raw supply will prove to be a bigger challenge than designing the machinery to do it. J From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 02:37:22 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:37:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <62f900cb0803261850k3f4957ceye4d6af863b83e57b@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> <62f900cb0803261850k3f4957ceye4d6af863b83e57b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803262137.22268.kanzure@gmail.com> On Wednesday 26 March 2008, John Winters wrote: > ?You need raw material, namely reduced hydrocarbons. ?Those stores > are quickly running out. ?The cost of ethane/ethene will follow that > of benzene. ?Maybe we can convert CO2, but that will be costly as > well. Oxidation of hydrocarbons is thermodynamically probable -- just > look how much energy we extract during combustion. ?The reverse > reaction will consume energy. > > I think in the end finding a sufficient raw supply will prove to be a > bigger challenge than designing the machinery to do it. http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Asteroid_mining http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Orbital_algae_farms -- which can scale as you need it to (just add more surface area). biofuels :) - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 02:46:12 2008 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:16:12 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080326210848.023c4048@satx.rr.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <200803262014.43789.kanzure@gmail.com> <710b78fc0803261829i6d5d68a4o246d41c7046e439d@mail.gmail.com> <200803262057.50454.kanzure@gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080326210848.023c4048@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0803261946s2355e271m24a389a2c3e70001@mail.gmail.com> On 27/03/2008, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:57 PM 3/26/2008 -0500, Bryan wrote: > > >You're not perfectly spherical any more, though. > > I've met Emlyn, in fact we've been on TV together. He's never been > perfectly spherical. Not even approximately spherical. > > Damien Broderick I'm become increasingly spherical over time, though. Occupational hazard perhaps. Maybe I'll blow myself up into manageable chunks! -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 27 02:32:23 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:32:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Yes Sam Harris Can In-Reply-To: <47EA7B23.20900@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <200803270301.m2R313dV001850@andromeda.ziaspace.com> On Behalf Of Kevin Freels ... The best example I could give would be someone here running for president and deciding to withdraw from here entirely because of some of Robert Bradbury's posts. (Where has he been by the way?) ... Robert is alive and well, altho he hasn't been posting for a while. He is living in Massachusetts. I heard from him about three weeks ago. I hate to admit it, but if one is running for president, it probably wouldn't be good to be seen with us. Mainstream humanity just isn't yet ready for a lot of the kinds of things that are posted here. You know some yahoo would find my legless female astronaut posts from the 90s, then you might as well admit you will never live on Pennsylvania Avenue just from hanging out with me. spike From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 27 02:36:59 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:36:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200803270305.m2R35e5U024173@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Amara Graps > Subject: Re: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant > > I think that his mixing the genders in the way he did > (probably, he felt that he had no choice) demonstrates the > spectrum of the genders. I think that this is fantastic, wonderful news... Amara Amara, forgive me for being pessimistic, but I have suspected since this first hit the headlines that this whole thing is a hoax. Possibly my view is jaded from having gone thru 11 years of fertility treatments, learning how tweaky is the reproductive system, the hormone balances so critical, timing, etc, it is amazing it ever works. I didn't say anything when this first came out, and I could be wrong of course (I hope so.) spike From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Thu Mar 27 04:08:13 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:08:13 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0803261638q3c48343cu38227a2cb1d43c47@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> <200803261833.01933.kanzure@gmail.com> <710b78fc0803261638q3c48343cu38227a2cb1d43c47@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47EB1DAD.3050304@insightbb.com> Darn. A day late and a dollar short AGAIN! One day though. One day. Emlyn wrote: > There was a lot of media buzz about "contour crafting" a few years ago > (basically, a big printer that deposits concrete). > > eg: > http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4764-robot-builder-could-print-houses.html > > Here's the guy's site: > http://www.contourcrafting.org/ > > From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Thu Mar 27 04:11:31 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:11:31 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com> Sorry if I missed the obvious, but are you referring to something similar to a canon? A long tunnel dug into the ground stuffed with a projectile and a nuke behind it? Gary Miller wrote: > Bryan asked: > > >>> Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? >>> > > My Response: > > Yes, but only on a small basis. > > 1. Go to an existing (already polluted) underground Atomic test site. > > 2. Plant geothermal generators in the desert (molten salt?) > > 3. Drill a central shaft and detonate an underground nuclear device deep > enough to prevent > further topside irradiation. > > 4. Use the geothermal generators to mine the heat from underground magma > ball created by the blast > converting it to electricity. > > 5. When power levels begin to drop repeat step 3 as required. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Thu Mar 27 04:21:21 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:21:21 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <47EB20C1.2050806@insightbb.com> Kevin Freels wrote: > Sorry if I missed the obvious, but are you referring to something > similar to a canon? A long tunnel dug into the ground stuffed with a > projectile and a nuke behind it? > > Gary Miller wrote: >> Bryan asked: >> >> >>>> Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? >>>> >> >> My Response: >> >> Yes, but only on a small basis. >> >> 1. Go to an existing (already polluted) underground Atomic test site. >> >> 2. Plant geothermal generators in the desert (molten salt?) >> >> 3. Drill a central shaft and detonate an underground nuclear device deep >> enough to prevent >> further topside irradiation. >> >> 4. Use the geothermal generators to mine the heat from underground magma >> ball created by the blast >> converting it to electricity. >> >> 5. When power levels begin to drop repeat step 3 as required. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > Please excuse the top-posting. Not sure how that happened. My question was in regards to Gary's post, not Bryan's. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 27 03:18:38 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:18:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stefano writes > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > > It's not a matter of discarding it, it's the second best power source > > besides power sats. > > > > But it's incredibly dangerous. Not just because of such things as > > there being no way to get rid of he waste, come cell repair machines > > who will care? The problem is any neutron source can be diverted into > > making extremely high grade plutonium. With much of that floating > > around homemade city busting nukes become something a well funded > > street gang can make. > > I am afraid that unless we are ready to go for solutions making 1984 and > Brave New World blush, we are eventually going to have to live with it > anyway. It is not as if we can forever prevent people - let alone > governments - from playing with neutrons. Yes. > In any event, it has never been too clear to me why the president of the > US of A should be trusted more not to get too nervous with the finger > on the trigger than any other entity... Who's trusting him or her? And if some people do trust him (her), what difference does it make? They're hardly going to do anything about it. On the other hand, in case you're interested in a more logical distribution of nuclear warfare potential, I have several ideas that might interest you and other readers. Instead of the present arrangement we could (A) choose a nation at random to possess all of America's nuclear-related weapons. I suppose that there is just as good a chance of (most likely) some African nation being as or more responsible than the president of the U.S. (B) the United States could donate all of its nuclear arsenal to the U.N., although as in (A) most likely an African leader would end up in control of it. But at least it would be fair. (C) go back to the cold-war (which turned out well, by the way) using the MAD principle. So tomorrow the U.S. could just give away around half of its nuclear arsenal to, say, Russia or China. Or maybe you have some ideas of how an even better distribution of nuclear armaments could be devised that would be entirely superior to the present arrangement. But, of course, getting the leaders of the U.S. and of the other nuclear powers to go along with you, even if you were to adopt one of the very reasonable (A), (B), or (C) that I outlined. Lee From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 27 02:52:50 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:52:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ted and google universe Message-ID: <200803270321.m2R3LU8W016176@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Whoa, is this wicked cool or WHAT? http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/224 http://earth.google.com/sky/skyedu.html Everyone here, I only ask that you spend a minute or two each week pondering how lucky we all are to have been born late enough in history to see this stuff develop. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 27 03:35:39 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:35:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Network segmentation was Re: America: Home of All Evil References: <7641ddc60803251438i6a2b6e5dwc35b51c210010aef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <67db01c88fbc$2a584270$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Rafal wrote Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 2:38 PM Subject: Network segmentation was Re: [ExI] America: Home of All Evil > In our evolutionary history there were millions of little > tribal networks and subnetworks that formed, and > mutated. The legalized right to kill (within a network) > and the ability to kill (between small networks) had > a profound impact on the survival of constituent nodes > of these networks (i.e. humans) and provided strong > selective pressure acting through the selection of > individual preferences that could produce more stable > networks. In plainer English, could some of this be exemplified by the demonstrated survivability of *nations* and *tribes*? That's what I would think, anyway. The "strong selective pressure" you speak of is a little ambiguous. You may be speaking of selection at the individual human biological (i.e. gene) level, which is presumed by some of us, especially lately, to directly contribute to key characteristics of national and ethnic groups. Or you may be speaking strictly of a sort of "group selection" which---when memes are also considered ---is a very valid way of describing why some nations prospered (e.g. Rome, the UK, Carthage, Louis XIV France, etc.) in direct competition with their neighbors, and passed on intact the social principles and memes responsible for that survival. Or both. > It is more difficult to kill people if the right > to kill is [legally] limited, or if the physical > ability to kill is limited by a balance of forces. > Tribes insisting on the limitation of power of > leaders and neighbors were more likely to have > a stable existence, At least in the last two hundred years or so. Before that, absolute power in the hands of a very few evidently was a most competitive and successful approach. > improving the fitness of people who dislike being dominated. Yes. > The need for network segmentation is even more > important now than in our evolutionary past, > unfortunately the innate segmentation instinct > (that contributes to the negative opinions of > the US) is not strong enough. As an example, an increase in nationalistic feelings among the citizens of various *nations* could enhance the desirable kind of segmentation you're talking about? > It does not suffice to maintain segmentation > which is why I am writing the email on PC > running some sort of Windows OS, and lots > of losers fall for nationalistic or worse, > United-Nations type feelings. You've lost me :-) How, specifically, would the concept of network segmentation be applied to different OS's or PC emailers? > If we survive the singularity and get uploaded, > network security and therefore the need for > network segmentation, will mean much more > than protection from spam. Definitely. Lee From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Thu Mar 27 05:12:54 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:12:54 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Predictions for 2008 from 1968 In-Reply-To: <200803261833.43192.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0803252101r26f37ber2dd3e1ddaae27270@mail.gmail.com> <47EA833F.30100@insightbb.com> <200803261833.43192.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47EB2CD6.2050308@insightbb.com> At first when I saw Emlyn's post, I thought - gee - a day late and a dollar short. But then I looked at what they were doing and realized they were going about it all wrong. Here's a few problems with their process: 1.) Concrete construction = ugly 2.) Usefulness is limited with concrete walls. People like to be able to hang pictures, 3.) Concrete sweats - creates moisture problems. 4.) Flat roofs cause drainage and leakage problems. 5.) They still need to deal with putting in windows and doors, door frames, trim, and make sure they seal against the concrete which is a nightmare. 6.) Built on slab instead of crawlspace. 7.) Difficult to remodel. 8.) Stairways, basements, etc cannot be built. So how do we address these things and make this practical? I'm not sure. I'm thinking that we would need several different "heads" or "print cartridges" depending on the application. Foundations would be concrete. Walls would need to be made of a yet-to-be-invented material. Something strong, waterproof, easy to change later if you wanted to remodel, yet soft enough to put a nail in to hang a picture. It would need a very high R-rating as well. Some parts would have to be modular - such as windows, doors, etc. But the right process would allow for a snap-in process. Heads will need to be able to rotate sideways so one could "print" basic walls, then pop in windows, then "print" the exterior "finish". The reason is because the way siding and such overlaps windows seams to ensure there are no leaks. Of course, printing a window would be nice. But I'm not sure that can be done. I already have some ideas how the electrical would be done. The main areas to address I see are: 1.) How do you manage to have something that can print as fine as needed for light switches and hinges and still manage to do walls and floors in a reasonable time. 2.) What is the absolute fewest number of different materials necessary to accomplish this. 3.) How do you handle "printing" for things that are above open space? (ie ceilings, floors over crawlspaces, doorways, etc. This will be critical when designing hinges, switches, and other such things. How can each of the materials be made easy to work with? One thing that just came to mind is epoxy resin. Both are liquid while apart, but mixed together they solidify. Maybe a similar process could be used here. Mixing occurs at the nozzle and hardens as it is laid down. Of course 15 minutes is too long. More like .25 seconds would be ideal (as a guess).I'll have to put some real thought to it before I post on the wiki so give me a few days. It would be great to come up with the requirements and then build a miniature prototype hat makes miniature houses. Are you familiar with the open source 3d printer? http://fabathome.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Kevin Freels wrote: > >> I have been working on a complete tear down and rebuild of my home >> for several years and sometimes it just amazes me how archaic the >> processes are and how much technology goes into them. I have >> high-tech lithium-ion powered framing nailers, a laser sliding mitre >> saw, and an insulation blower but still what I am resorting to is >> sticking shaped trees together with metal pins and cramming stuffing >> into the middle to hold in the warmth. Even worse is the need to >> thread the entire structure with pipes and wires. As much fun as I >> have with the framing nailer I can't help but to be a bit >> disappointed in my fancy log cabin from time to time. I should be >> able to design the thing on my computer and just print my new rooms >> with a giant ink-jet; power and plumbing integrated just like an IC >> chip. >> > > Let's collaborate on the system specs: > > http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Automated_shelter_fabrication > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 27 04:50:42 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:50:42 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) Message-ID: Bryan Bishop: >I had the unfortunate experience of reading through Tides of Light >recently. In it, a cybernetic pseudopodia organism plays with a hu and >throws him down a giant shaft straight through the center of a planet. >He picks up lots and lots of velocity. Could be a useful effect. Not by the physics that we know. If the planet is the size of the Earth, the hu will return to the cybernetic pseudopodia in 84 minutes with the same speed that it was thrown. Amara P.S. This is a well-known upper-level or graduate comprehensive physics exam question. =======================Old Extropians Email================= Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 23:36:42 +0100 From: Amara Graps Subject: Re: Cooling technique for Jupiter brains From: Spike Jones Wed, 09 Feb 2000: >Here's one I thought about: suppose you had a solid uniform sphere, >Earth-sized, with a 600 km diameter hole drilled thru the middle. >Suppose the construction workers toss stuff in the hole just for the >fun of seeing it pop back up 88 minutes later. At first it does so, but >some yahoo on the other side has the same idea and pretty soon >a lot of people are throwing garbage in the enormous bottomless pit, >and consequently the stuff starts to hit other junk and lose >energy and a big ball of stuff starts to form in the center. Or does >it? What is the shape of the gravitational field in that tunnel? > >We already know if one were inside a huge hollow sphere there >is no gravitational field, easily proven by one integral, but what >about a sphere with a cylindrical tunnel? spike Hey you know this problem! Fun isn't it? I draw some notes here from one of my old homework. Maybe the answer to your question will pop out here somewhere along the way. First of all, regarding the time it takes to fall from one end to the other (it takes 42 minutes each way) it doesn't matter _where_ the ends of the cylinder are located, i.e. where "yahoo_A" and "yahoo_B" are pitching their trash at each other. The time to fall from one end to the other (by gravity alone) is independent of the two places. Second of all (and this is even more cool :-), the object when it falls has an oscillatory motion (single harmonic motion about the center of the earth). So yahoo_A will get his/her/it's trash thrown *right back* at him. Think of the games! It looks like this. (x=B) B (y should be perpendicular, but ascii drawing is hard) / tunnel->/x=0 x theta=angle from x=0 / y -- / to where mass m slides through / / tunnel / A (x=A) F = -G M' m /r^2 rhat M'=mass enclosed by the sphere =(4/3) pi rho r^3 m = mass falling through tunnel rhat = r direction F = (-Gm/r^2)(4/3 pi rho r^3) rhat F=-Gm(4/3) pi rho r rhat The x component of F is the only one that matters. F = Fx = Fsin(theta) but sin(theta) = x/r Fsin(theta) = F(x/r) =-G(4/3 pi rho r m) x/r F = -G(4/3 pi rho m) x see! indep of theta ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this is like a spring constant k i.e. F = -kx, shows the oscillatory behavior of the mass thrown down the tube (so in 42 min, it will come right back at you like a rubber band!) Period of oscillator of mass m: T = (2pi/2) SQRT(m/k) substitute m T = 2pi(SQRT(3/(4 pi G rho)) At A or B, the body is at the surface of the Earth where gravitational force on m is F = GMm/R^2 And we know M=(4/3)pi rho R^3 Substitute M: F = (4/3) G m pi rho R = mg Note g/R = (4/3) G pi rho Therefore the period T = 2pi SQRT(R/g) R = 6.37E6m, g = 9.8 m/s^2 ==> T = 85 minutes for the full period (from AtoB and return) Amara ******************************************************************** Amara Graps email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: finger agraps at shell5.ba.best.com Multiplex Answers ******************************************************************** Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 22:56:43 -0800 From: Spike Jones Subject: Re: Cooling technique for Jupiter brains > From: Spike Jones Wed, 09 Feb 2000: > > >energy and a big ball of stuff starts to form in the center. Or does > >it? What is the shape of the gravitational field in that tunnel? Jeff's right. The G field increases linearly along the axis of the tunnel and and is unchanging in any direction away from the axis. So then, the junk tossed inside the tunnel, upon losing kinetic energy, would form a flattened disk, right? The junk pile would attract itself, and would have a G field axial along the tunnel only. So the disk would be flattened along the direction of the tunnel until it touched the sides. > Amara Graps wrote: > Hey you know this problem! Fun isn't it? Ja! > First of all, regarding the time it takes to fall from one > end to the other (it takes 42 minutes each way) it doesn't > matter _where_ the ends of the cylinder are located, i.e. where > "yahoo_A" and "yahoo_B" are pitching their trash at each other. > The time to fall from one end to the other (by gravity alone) > is independent of the two places. Ja, assuming of course the tunnel passes thru the center of the nonrotating sphere. > Second of all (and this is even more cool :-), the > object when it falls has an oscillatory motion (single > harmonic motion about the center of the earth). and the time it takes to oscillate one full cycle is equal to the time to orbit around the sphere, assuming the lowest possible orbit around a smooth sphere with no atmosphere. {8-] > ==> T = 85 minutes for the full period (from AtoB and return) If you are in a boring meeting and need to derive the mass of the earth, one need only remember the orbit time of 85 minutes, and it can be backed out with only that information. The lowest satellites take a little longer, since they need to be a couple hundred km above the deck so they dont get dragged down immediately by the atmosphere. There is another way, if you need the earth's mass to only one digit of precision: you know the volume of a sphere is 4/3pi*r^3, but for single digit accuracy, pi~3, so V~4*r^3, and you know that the km was initially proposed as 1/10,000 the distance from the equator to the pole, so the radius of the earth can be calculated to be 10,000/pi*2~6370 km. Cube that and quadruple it, and the volume of the earth comes out to close enough to 1E12 km^3, and since the density of iron and nickel are in the 8000 kg/m^3 range and granite and other rocky stuff is in the 4000 range, then assume an average density of about 6000 kg/m^3 and you get an earth mass of 6E24 kg, which is quite close enough. From that, knowing that a 1 kg mass weighs a force of 9.8 newtons, one can calculate the universal gravitation constant without having any reference material handy, assuming you remember that F=GMm/R^2, since you know F, M, m and R. But I digress. {8-] ====================================================== -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From amara at amara.com Thu Mar 27 05:02:43 2008 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:02:43 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant Message-ID: Hmm, I don't think so, Spike. Let's wait four months, and we'll know for sure. http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2008/03/26/pregnant-man.htm Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Research Scientist, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Boulder, Colorado From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 05:29:13 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:29:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion In-Reply-To: <00b601c88f95$6fce4fb0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <00b601c88f95$6fce4fb0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: Folks, re this thread, please go read the Wikipedia article on plutonium. Pu 238 is a very different substance from Pu 239, and Pu 240 is yet another. I.e., the Pu in weapons is not useful in radiothermal power supplies. Keith From lcorbin at rawbw.com Thu Mar 27 06:24:33 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:24:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work Message-ID: <683001c88fd3$5132bc10$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Ludwig wrote ----- Original Message ----- From: Ludwig Wittgenstein To: Ludwig Ficker Cc: lcorbin at rawbw.com; mschlicht at ViennaCircle.com Sent: November 7, 1919 2:38 PM Subject: The Line I Should Have Written in Tractatus Preface > [Regarding Tractatus] the book's point is an ethical one. I once > meant to include in the preface a sentence which is not in fact > there now, but which I will write out for you here, because > it will perhaps be a key to the work for you. What I meant > to write, then, was this: My work consists of two parts: the > one presented here plus all that I have not written. And > *it is precisely this second part that is the important one*. > My book draws limits to the sphere of the ethical from the > inside, as it were, and I am convinced that this is the > ONLY rigorous way of drawing those limits. [Janik & Toulmin, 1973,. p. 192, as I quote from http://www.isrl.uiuc.edu/~chip/pubs/speaking.shtml] Good heavens! What an *out*! Why didn't any author before Wittgenstein have the witt to have thought of this!? For, not only do we have to credit Wittgenstein with what he did say, but we must also credit him for all the unfathomable wisdom in what he did *not* say! Indeed, the man was a genius. Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 27 06:44:20 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 01:44:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work In-Reply-To: <683001c88fd3$5132bc10$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <683001c88fd3$5132bc10$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080327013905.02398420@satx.rr.com> At 11:24 PM 3/26/2008 -0700, Ludwig Corbin wrote: >Why didn't any author before >Wittgenstein have the witt to have thought of this!? For, not only >do we have to credit Wittgenstein with what he did say, but we >must also credit him for all the unfathomable wisdom in what >he did *not* say! Not necessarily. He didn't *write* much, but he *spoke* a great deal. His seminars were said to be herculean monologues of demonic cerebration, interspersed with tormented silence. His students, as you know, kept fairly detailed journals of his struggle with the ineffable, transcribed as the Blue Book, the Brown Book, etc, repudiating the TRACTATUS. But of course, whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Damien Broderick From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 27 11:10:32 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:10:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <47EB20C1.2050806@insightbb.com> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com><200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com><00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com> <47EB20C1.2050806@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <010d01c88ffb$2da10630$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Kevin Freels asked : >> Sorry if I missed the obvious, but are you referring to something similar to a canon? A long tunnel dug into the ground stuffed with a projectile and a nuke behind it? >> No the whole objective of the space elevator was to create a transport so we could beam energy back to earth. My idea was that due to to the difficulties of going up into space right now, we focus our resources on developing innovative energy source here on Earth or perhaps below the Earths surface hence (Going Down). Solar is already being worked to death and coupled with nanotechnology to improve cell efficiencies shows real promise. Wind Farms are increasing steadily but looks to be a bit player with no hopes of dramatically increasing it's efficiency. Tidal generation has promise but is limited in where it can be done. Hydroelectric is good but we'd need some megaengineering to dig channels from the Great Lakes across the midwest and build hydroelectric plants along the way. We may need to do that eventually anyway to increase the water supply to states in the midwest but we will be fighting the ecologists and states that border the Great Lakes all the way. My idea was to just bury the nuke deep enough that upon detonation we create artificial Geothermal energy sources here on Earth. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 12:26:19 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:26:19 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com><200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com><00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2><47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com><47EB20C1.2050806@insightbb.com> <010d01c88ffb$2da10630$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <00a401c89005$c3e6d3e0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> Gary Miller>My idea was to just bury the nuke deep enough that upon detonation we create artificial Geothermal energy sources here on Earth. As far as I know, Iceland uses geothermal a lot. But they've high volcanic activity all across the island. Geothermal doesn't need to be very deep. There's an alternative which is the hot rock bed. You just dig deep enough (3 - 4 km) to reach a really hot rock and then pour water down the hole and it creates vapour. Then we can use a trustworthy steam turbine to produce our beloved electricity. http://exergy.se/goran/cng/alten/proj/98/geotermal/geo.htm From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 12:40:12 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:40:12 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 Message-ID: <470a3c520803270540g393e0d3evff5be65f3a8e4532@mail.gmail.com> Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 Note: it is Lincoln Cannon and not Robert Geraci as it has been announced to some lists. Robert ( http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/religion_spirituality_and_the_avatar/ ) will of course be invited to the talk and I hope he will come). http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/lincoln_cannon_of_the_mormon_transhumanist_association_in_second_life_march/ Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association will give a presentation and a Q/A session in Second Life, on March 30 at 10:00 PST, at the virtual headquarters of SL-Transhumanists. Abstract: Transhumanism is compatible with at least some religious forms, as illustrated by parallels between basic Transhumanist ideas and an authentic interpretation of Mormon metaphysics, theodicy, eschatology and soteriology. These parallels also provide a basis from which to judge the relative compatibility of other religious forms, such as Christianity, with Transhumanism. SUNDAY - MARCH, 30 1000 AM - 1200 PM SLT SL-Transhumanists @ extropia core SLURL The Mormon Transhumanist Association promotes practical faith in human exaltation through charitable use of science and technology. The association was founded on 3 March 2006 and affiliated with the World Transhumanist Association on 6 July 2006. Read the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation: (1) We seek the spiritual and physical exaltation of individuals and their anatomies, as well as communities and their environments, according to their wills, desires and laws, to the extent they are not oppressive. (2) We believe that scientific knowledge and technological power are among the means ordained of God to enable such exaltation, including realization of diverse prophetic visions of transfiguration, immortality, resurrection, renewal of this world, and the discovery and creation of worlds without end. (3) We feel a duty to use science and technology according to wisdom and inspiration, to identify and prepare for risks and responsibilities associated with future advances, and to persuade others to do likewise. Lincoln gave a talk last year at the Seminar on H+ and Religion in SL. His presentation is archived here. His conclusions: "We believe that scientific knowledge and technological power are among the means ordained of God to enable such exaltation, including realization of diverse prophetic visions of transfiguration, immortality, resurrection, renewal of this world, and the discovery and creation of worlds without end". This is, I believe, a perfect explanation of why, despite what fundamentalists may say, transhumanism is not at all incompatible with religion but, on the contrary, each of the two sets of sensibilities can boost the other in a positive feedback loop. I did not know much (still don't) about Mormonism before meeting the people of the Mormon Transhumanist Association. My mental image of Mormons was (still is) derived from movies: people leaving in Utah, always well dressed, very hardworking and much too serious (and men with many wives). But my image of the MTA is that of a community of smart and motivated transhumanists who see no conflict, but on the contrary mutual reinforcement, between transhumanism and their faith. And there must be something true in the images of Mormons as very serious and hardworking people, because the MTA website is by far the best transhumanist community site in terms of both IT implementation and content. I consider the MTA as a transhumanist success story that may be (I will ask Lincoln on Sunday) "exported" to other religions and Christian denominations. From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 27 08:13:43 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 01:13:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work In-Reply-To: <683001c88fd3$5132bc10$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <683001c88fd3$5132bc10$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Ludwig wrote > > to write, then, was this: My work consists of two parts: the > > one presented here plus all that I have not written. And > > *it is precisely this second part that is the important one*. > > My book draws limits to the sphere of the ethical from the > > inside, as it were, and I am convinced that this is the > > ONLY rigorous way of drawing those limits. Lee, you might similarly appreciate Buckminster Fuller's "Unity is plural and at minimum two." Not to mention the semiotics of Peirce, the Oneness of Taoism, the ineluctable role of the observer in any model of reality, the inherent subjectivity of (Bayesian) probability, or my frequent emphasis of the importance of context... - Jef From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 13:25:41 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:25:41 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sustainable Medicine Message-ID: <580930c20803270625k1ff46f1jef7991cca8557568@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: nvitamore at austin.rr.com Date: Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:40 PM Subject: To: stefano.vaj at gmail.com Stefano, please forward this to the list, as I am out of my study and cannot post from this email address: Sefano writes: <> The future of medicine, for the not too distant future, is "regenerative." (I have a paper coming out in a book which is currently heading to the publishing house in the UK on this topic.) But regenerative medicine does not solve all the problems that will ensue. These problems will be socio-political, but perhaps more of a worldwide issue of distribution, as Buckminister so often wrote and spoke about. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com ? Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft(R) Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 13:44:11 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:44:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Sustainable Medicine In-Reply-To: <580930c20803270625k1ff46f1jef7991cca8557568@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20803270625k1ff46f1jef7991cca8557568@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803270844.12002.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 27 March 2008, Stefano Vaj wrote: > But regenerative medicine does not solve all the problems that will > ensue. These problems will be socio-political, but perhaps more of a > worldwide issue of distribution, as Buckminister so often wrote and > spoke about. Is it really an issue of distribution? Given the material resources, all you need is the information, and information diffusion has been successfully demonstrated with the advent of the internet. The material resources are mostly abundant, but there are restrictions, perhaps we can throw in some focus on (asteroid?) mining? I have been contemplating using bacteria to mine asteroids for precious metals and minerals, there's little stopping us. And we'd be able to significantly increase the amount of available 'rare' elements per person, especially if we catch a large rock into an orbital path directly above us. http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Moontank (only called a 'moon' tank because that's the first thought I had) - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Thu Mar 27 13:44:12 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:44:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) In-Reply-To: <010d01c88ffb$2da10630$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <47EA90CB.2000008@insightbb.com> <200803261828.21763.kanzure@gmail.com> <00c401c88f9f$a4959e60$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> <47EB1E73.90304@insightbb.com> <47EB20C1.2050806@insightbb.com> <010d01c88ffb$2da10630$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Miller Date: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:18 Subject: Re: [ExI] Space Elevator (Going Down) To: 'ExI chat list' > > Kevin Freels asked : > > >> Sorry if I missed the obvious, but are you referring to > somethingsimilar to a canon? A long tunnel dug into the ground > stuffed with a > projectile and a nuke behind it? >> > > > No the whole objective of the space elevator was to create a > transport so we > could beam energy back to earth. > > My idea was that due to to the difficulties of going up into > space right > now, we focus our resources on developing innovative energy > source here on Earth or perhaps below the Earths surface hence > (Going Down). > > Solar is already being worked to death and coupled with > nanotechnology to > improve cell efficiencies shows real promise. > > Wind Farms are increasing steadily but looks to be a bit player > with no > hopes of dramatically increasing it's efficiency. > > Tidal generation has promise but is limited in where it can be done. > > Hydroelectric is good but we'd need some megaengineering to dig > channelsfrom the Great Lakes across the midwest and build > hydroelectric plants along > the way. We may need to do that eventually anyway to > increase the water > supply to states in the midwest but we will be fighting the > ecologists and > states that border the Great Lakes all the way. > > My idea was to just bury the nuke deep enough that upon > detonation we create > artificial Geothermal energy sources here on Earth. > > OK. Thanks for clearing that up. I must have missed the first part and thought the goal here was to get out of the gravity well. I couldn't quite string together how you were planning to get into orbit by tunneling into the earth and detonating nukes! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ferox314 at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 06:10:06 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:10:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Transgender man is pregnant In-Reply-To: <200803270305.m2R35e5U024173@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803270305.m2R35e5U024173@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803262310o16e5049em6607f22675584530@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:36 PM, spike wrote: > Amara, forgive me for being pessimistic, but I have suspected since this > first hit the headlines that this whole thing is a hoax. Possibly my view > is jaded from having gone thru 11 years of fertility treatments, learning > how tweaky is the reproductive system, the hormone balances so critical, > timing, etc, it is amazing it ever works. I didn't say anything when this > first came out, and I could be wrong of course (I hope so.) Funny how if a woman takes more estrogen, she loses her period, and if a man takes more testosterone, he can ascend his testicles. Hormones, inter alia, illustrate how life is about balance. J From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 14:41:53 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:41:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion In-Reply-To: <00c301c88f9d$df70acc0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> References: <00c301c88f9d$df70acc0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Message-ID: <580930c20803270741h1db2cb0tee1387064579fea7@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Gary Miller wrote: > > My Response: > > As per Wikipedia... Plutonium 238 prepared by irradiating neptunium 237 > which is created in nuclear reactors. > No, no, you have your astronomy all wrong. Plutonium 238 is prepared by irradiating neptunium 237 which is prepared by irradiating uranium 235 which is prepared by irradiating saturnium 231 which is prepared by irradiating juppiterium 229. :-))) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ain_ani at yahoo.com Thu Mar 27 14:53:29 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work Message-ID: <917496.38410.qm@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Of course, you understand what he meant by this? That which can be expressed, can be done so precisely; to a mathematically perfect degree. This is what he has done in the written Tractatus. Logic and the modes of human expression are finite and thus definable. That which cannot be so expressed (eg, the truths of ethics, religion etc...those which become manifest through a person's whole world and cannot be constrained to a mere linguistic utterance), we should not even attempt to speak about for we will only be able to lead further away from true understanding about it. This is what he wrote not about, but hoped to demonstrate through a process of showing rather than explaining. It is precisely this second part which is the most important - Wittgenstein claimed that the Tractatus had solved all the problems of logic and philosophy, and made evident how little was accomplished by doing this. For, the real problems of life are those which cannot be discussed and dissected so easily: they are the religious and the ethical. The 'spiritual' concerns of man, if you will. Mike ----- Original Message ---- From: Lee Corbin To: ExI chat list Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:24:33 AM Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work Ludwig wrote ----- Original Message ----- From: Ludwig Wittgenstein To: Ludwig Ficker Cc: lcorbin at rawbw.com; mschlicht at ViennaCircle.com Sent: November 7, 1919 2:38 PM Subject: The Line I Should Have Written in Tractatus Preface > [Regarding Tractatus] the book's point is an ethical one. I once > meant to include in the preface a sentence which is not in fact > there now, but which I will write out for you here, because > it will perhaps be a key to the work for you. What I meant > to write, then, was this: My work consists of two parts: the > one presented here plus all that I have not written. And > *it is precisely this second part that is the important one*. > My book draws limits to the sphere of the ethical from the > inside, as it were, and I am convinced that this is the > ONLY rigorous way of drawing those limits. [Janik & Toulmin, 1973,. p. 192, as I quote from http://www.isrl.uiuc.edu/~chip/pubs/speaking.shtml] Good heavens! What an *out*! Why didn't any author before Wittgenstein have the witt to have thought of this!? For, not only do we have to credit Wittgenstein with what he did say, but we must also credit him for all the unfathomable wisdom in what he did *not* say! Indeed, the man was a genius. Lee _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Thu Mar 27 15:40:27 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:40:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion References: Message-ID: <002001c89020$e81d59d0$5dee4d0c@MyComputer> Me: >>Right know there are hundreds, probably thousands of tons of Plutonium >>on the planet Amara Graps" >Please tell NASA where they are located, because presently they have >enough only for the RTGS of about one more outer solar system mission. RTGS are not reactors, they just use the heat given off of Plutonium-238 due to its short half life of only 87 years. Bombs don't use it, they use Plutonium-239 and it has a half life of 24,110 years. John K Clark From jonkc at att.net Thu Mar 27 16:11:33 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:11:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion References: <032620081811.14923.47EA91E6000D078800003A4B2206424613979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <009401c89025$497ba9d0$5dee4d0c@MyComputer> aiguy at comcast.net >My understanding is that the nuclear warheads only have a certain shelf >life before the half-life of the nuclear warheads becomes degraded >enough that it has to be replaced. That is true because most modern nuclear bombs are thermonuclear bombs, and H Bombs need a small amount of Tritium which has a half life of only 12 years. They don't need a lot but they do need some and pound per pound Tritium is much harder to make than Plutonium. John K Clark From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 27 16:41:25 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:41:25 +0000 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion Message-ID: <032720081641.4046.47EBCE35000D444F00000FCE2200750330979A09070E@comcast.net> > > RTGS are not reactors, they just use the heat given off of Plutonium-238 > due to its short half life of only 87 years. Bombs don't use it, they use > Plutonium-239 and it has a half life of 24,110 years. > > John K Clark > Yes, John but based on the excerpt and links I have posted the the neptunium which can be recovered during the creation/reprocessing of Plutonium-239 is the primary ingredient necessary to create Plutonium-238. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium-238 Today, Plutonium 238 is usually prepared by the irradiation of neptunium 237, a minor actinide produced in nuclear reactors, that can be recovered from spent nuclear fuel during reprocessing, or by the irradiation of americium in a reactor. In both cases, the targets are subjected to a chemical treatment, including dissolution in nitric acid to extract the plutonium-238. A 100kg sample of light water reactor fuel that has been irradiated for three years contains only about 700 grams of neptunium 237, and the neptunium must be extracted selectively. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Thu Mar 27 17:38:22 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:38:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] nuclear fusion References: <032720081641.4046.47EBCE35000D444F00000FCE2200750330979A09070E@comcast.net> Message-ID: <032b01c89031$65e71760$5dee4d0c@MyComputer> aiguy at comcast.net > the neptunium which can be recovered during the >creation/reprocessing of Plutonium-239 is the > primary ingredient necessary to create Plutonium-238. Neptunium has a half life of only 2.3 days and that's why Plutonium-238 is harder to make than Plutoniun-239 that you use in bombs. John K Clark From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 27 15:43:42 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:43:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work In-Reply-To: <917496.38410.qm@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <917496.38410.qm@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Michael Miller wrote: > so easily: they are the religious and the ethical. The 'spiritual' concerns > of man, if you will. Yes, that is the point. But rather than the mystically-laden term "spiritual", might we not refer to it as the subject of *meaning*? - Jef From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Mar 27 15:43:42 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:43:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work In-Reply-To: <917496.38410.qm@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <917496.38410.qm@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Michael Miller wrote: > so easily: they are the religious and the ethical. The 'spiritual' concerns > of man, if you will. Yes, that is the point. But rather than the mystically-laden term "spiritual", might we not refer to it as the subject of *meaning*? - Jef From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Thu Mar 27 21:36:41 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:36:41 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Plutonium In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <885762.34066.qm@web27001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> To quote John and Amara >John K Clark jonkc at att.net : >>Right know there are hundreds, probably thousands of >>tons of Plutonium >>on the planet, >Please tell NASA where they are located, because >presently they have >enough only for the RTGS of about one more outer >solar system mission. >http://www.space.com/news/080306-nasa-plutonium->shortage-fin.html >NASA is planning to go around to the DOE centers >collecting what they >can find. Russia is selling NASA some, selling the >Indians some, then >the Russians say they have no more (uh huh ;-) ). >Presently, a highly possible result of the end of the >Cold War is that >the robotic exploration of the outer solar system >exploration might be >ended (or at least slowed down) as well. >Amara Well, the following recent document mentions where Britain thinks the world's plutonium is (see appendix seven) http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=4603 this document from Sep 07 is a thoroughly readable overview of how Britain came to possess 100 tons of "unirradiated separated plutonium in product stores at reprocessing plants" (the world's biggest), and what the hell we can do with it. I thoroughly recommend it to all the fission supporters out there. Apparently the USA has 420 tons inside fuel rods at nuclear plants, France has a mix of stuff inside reactors, inside spent fuel awaiting reprocessing, and already reprocessed. The trouble for NASA is that getting the Pu-238 out of the mix is expensive. When people were refining the stuff to make weapons grade >92% Pu-239 (the report gives handy definitions of different plutonium grades), they separated out the Pu-238. All the stuff lieing around is a mix. Knowing NASA budgets, they want Pu-238 at a reasonable price ready separated, rather than needing work. Pressurised water reactor fuel is only 2.2% Pu-238. Either NASA needs to get someone separating the stuff (call it an "Improving next generation civil reactor fuel programme" and get the DOE to separate the Pu-238 out of fuel rods) or to bite the bullet and use Americium-241 instead (1/4 the energy density and requires more shielding - will make deep space probes a lot more expensive, but still just about doable). Tom ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Thu Mar 27 22:03:12 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:03:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I've been following the "getting big loads into orbit" discussions, and I'm quite a fan of the subject. The space elevator does require amazing materials, but they are theoretically possible. The problem is, given space junk (all but the lowest part of the cable) and monatomic oxygen attack (the lowest part), how do you keep repairing it in time? The wikipedia article on space tethers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tether mentions the SEDS-2 experiment was expected to last 2 weeks, but was cut after 3.7 days. (the wiki article includes references to your space elevators, skyhooks which don't reach the ground, satellite orbit alteration with tethers - all articles accessible from the main one). I like the idea of the launch loop - 2000km iron cable track moving at 14km/s, using magnetism to accelerate loads. There's something pleasingly Isembard Kingdom Brunel about the whole concept, and while it has issues it doesn't use any materials that don't currently exist. (The potential dealbreaker on this on is control circuits capable of adjusting the capable every microsecond). Laser launch looks very feasible - the heat exchanger rockets seem doable with today's technology, it's just the control system that would require serious R&D. The only issue with this launch type is that it launches a huge number of very small packages skywards - Keith, how small a package can you get away with for powersat construction? Railgun/gas gun/launch track technologies - there exist several possibilities for boosting things to orbit with short,massive acceleration - I doubt solar cells would survive it. The overall space launch market isn't huge at the moment (55 launches in 2005, according to one report I read - couldn't find what the total launch mass was though). Power satellites require a massively bigger capability than at present. On the other hand, massive launch capabilities won't be developed unless there's an industry crying out for it. So, keep on designing the power satellites - it will keep the hope of space resource utilisation going. Tom __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. More Ways to Keep in Touch. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Thu Mar 27 22:05:41 2008 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:05:41 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Nukes underground In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <90414.8984.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> >>Gary Miller wrote: > Bryan asked: > > >>> Has anybody considered the idea of blowing up the planet? >>> > >> My Response: >> >> Yes, but only on a small basis. >> >> 1. Go to an existing (already polluted) underground >Atomic test site. >> >> 2. Plant geothermal generators in the desert >(molten salt?) >> >> 3. Drill a central shaft and detonate an underground nuclear device deep >> enough to prevent >> further topside irradiation. >> >> 4. Use the geothermal generators to mine the heat from underground magma >> ball created by the blast >> converting it to electricity. >> >> 5. When power levels begin to drop repeat step 3 as required. You mean like project PACER tried to do, but slightly different? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACER Tom ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 22:40:33 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:40:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com> <67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803271540xccc4c94v36fa6efc22317db8@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > On the other hand, in case you're interested in a more logical > distribution > of nuclear warfare potential, I have several ideas that might interest you > and other readers. > > Instead of the present arrangement we could > > (A) choose a nation at random to possess all of America's nuclear-related > weapons. I suppose that there is just as good a chance of (most > likely) some African nation being as or more responsible than the > president of the U.S. > (B) the United States could donate all of its nuclear arsenal to the U.N., > although as in (A) most likely an African leader would end up in > control of it. But at least it would be fair. > (C) go back to the cold-war (which turned out well, by the way) using > the MAD principle. So tomorrow the U.S. could just give away > around half of its nuclear arsenal to, say, Russia or China. > > Or maybe you have some ideas of how an even better distribution > of nuclear armaments could be devised that would be entirely > superior to the present arrangement. > No, I think your ideas are good enough, even though admittedly they would be hard to implement face to obvious resistance from the interested party. Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aiguy at comcast.net Thu Mar 27 23:05:55 2008 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:05:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nukes underground In-Reply-To: <90414.8984.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <90414.8984.qm@web27006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <019301c8905f$1d4d57c0$6401a8c0@ZANDRA2> Tom said: >> You mean like project PACER tried to do, but slightly different? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACER >> My Response: I'm sure their concept was much better refined and engineered than my initial concept. I had never heard of their project but it is very exciting that they actually studied the feasibility of it. But even though the idea didn't make sense based on 1970's energy costs, it might make a lot of sense at 2010 energy costs. And if we know our nuclear bombs have a fixed shelf life and we have to replace them anyway, then using the bombs we have to make energy before they are useless essentially makes them free doesn't it. And as long as we do not exceed the number and size of bombs agreed to in our weapons treaties we are still maintaining nuclear parity and might even help the Russian by buying some of theirs that are ready to expire. I expect as we make further technological stride towards energy self-sufficiency the oil producing countries are going to panic seeing their only cash cow headed towards the barn door and start raising the cost per barrel now to stockpile their loot before we manage to start decreasing our petroleum imports. But if modern day fission reactors are still more cost effective than Pacer would be then I'd say we'd still be better off staying with proven nuclear technology so long as we build them in places that make sense and require states to allow us to haul the waste away to the geologically stable waste site which we've already paid for. From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 27 23:22:57 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:22:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> On Thursday 27 March 2008, Tom Nowell wrote: > I've been following the "getting big loads into orbit" > discussions, and I'm quite a fan of the subject. I checked your list. You don't include LOX. The only reason we say "LOX ain't cheap" is because nobody is making it cheap. You have oxygen all around you. You need about 3000 PSI to get it down into the liquid state, and then you're good to go. Let's work with that. Plus, we can get more oxygen from the other side of the atmosphere as well. - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 28 07:03:09 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:03:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "Chemical signalling drives nanomachines" Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328020007.02461f00@satx.rr.com> [I don't know how new this really is--the slur between nano and micro is irritating:] http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1913 Chemical signalling drives nanomachines Friday, 28 March 2008 by Anna Canale-Parola Cosmos Online SYDNEY: Scientists have found a way to make minute synthetic bubbles, known as microcapsules, move by mimicking the behaviour of biological cells. The technique brings us one step closer to nanomachines with applications ranging from drug delivery to fuel cells. The team from the University of Pittsburgh in the U.S. have used computational modelling to demonstrate how the controlled motion of these microcapsules could be manipulated to do tasks at the microscopic scale. The technique could eventually be applied to procedures such as targeted drug delivery, where the capsules would be directed though the body to a target site and then "exploded" by heat from lasers, releasing the particles of drugs within them. Bold and exciting "This is a very bold and exciting idea," enthused Michael Cortie, director of the Institute for Nanoscale Technology at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), who was not involved in the research. "It goes one step further in the direction of trying to achieve a nanorobot." To make the discovery, chemical engineer Anna Balazs, and her team used computer simulations to design a system of microscopic capsules that move by communicating in the same way that organic cells do. They report the find this week in the American Chemical Society journal ACSNano. "Biological cells communicate through a complex chemical process where a signalling cell secretes molecules that are then detected by receptors on the target cell," says the study. "We show how one microcapsule 'signals' to another and thereby initiates the motion of both." The team's simulation models two fluid-filled polymer capsules resting on a surface within a viscous fluid. One of these, the "signalling" capsule, contains nanoparticles ? tiny particles less than 100 nanometres across (one nanometre is a billionth of a metre) - which diffuse through the porous shell and into the surrounding fluid. These particles affect the adhesive properties of the surface, making parts of it less or more sticky. The second "target" capsule is attracted to the more sticky part of the surface, and so moves towards to it. This movement affects the fluid around the first (signalling) capsule ? think of the wake left by a boat moving in water ? and drives it to follow. The nanoparticles therefore act as a stimulus, causing first one, then both capsules to move. Continuous motion (and stopping) can be achieved by carefully altering some of the system variables, such as the size of the capsule, the density of the host fluid and the absorption properties of the surface. Balazs describes the groundbreaking nature of their work: "It is the first study to predict how to get two inanimate microscopic objects ? the microcapsules ? to effectively communicate with each other and thereby carry out a concerted action ? namely, motion." Fundamental insights The find also provides insight into the fundamental processes that control the movement of biological cells as they respond to chemicals in their environment. But the potential applications for moveable nanomachines are what the experts are excited about. "These communicating microcapsules could be used in microfluidics, which are small-scale devices used to carry out rapid biological assays or to perform synthesis of minute quantities of chemicals," said Balazs. "It is bringing us closer to the goal of designing "smart materials" that can autonomously perform specific functions." "The possibilities for this kind of small-scale technology are very optimistic," added Michael Cortie. "If everyone systematically works on the problems faced [in nanotechnology research], we will have breakthroughs that could make a tangible difference to human health and the energy problem." "This is a really cool piece of work," agreed Mike Ford, an associate professor of nanotechnology also at UTS in Sydney. "The work is more at the level of basic science, however one could imagine a raft of applications that might spring out of this work later down the track, such as controlling the motion of micro-objects in liquids and enforcing collective motion." From max at maxmore.com Fri Mar 28 07:27:43 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:27:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Max More's blog (new) Message-ID: <20080328072744.QHDZ20598.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> As you know, I'm an old-fashioned kind of guy. But I finally decided to try this new-fangled "blog" thang. http://strategicphilosophy.blogspot.com/ Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 09:52:13 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:52:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: > I've been following the "getting big loads into orbit" > discussions, and I'm quite a fan of the subject. > The space elevator does require amazing materials, > but they are theoretically possible. The problem is, > given space junk (all but the lowest part of the > cable) and monatomic oxygen attack (the lowest part), > how do you keep repairing it in time? The wikipedia > article on space tethers > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tether The Wikipedia article does not consider moving cable type elevators. That deals with the monatonic oxygen because the fast moving cable is one exposed briefly. The space elevator project assumes a fleet of ion engine space tugs and 5 years of gathering up the junk and pushing it out to GEO where it becomes the counterweight. > mentions the SEDS-2 experiment was expected to last 2 > weeks, but was cut after 3.7 days. (the wiki article > includes references to your space elevators, skyhooks > which don't reach the ground, satellite orbit > alteration with tethers - all articles accessible from > the main one). > > I like the idea of the launch loop - 2000km iron cable > track moving at 14km/s, using magnetism to accelerate > loads. There's something pleasingly Isembard Kingdom > Brunel about the whole concept, and while it has > issues it doesn't use any materials that don't > currently exist. (The potential dealbreaker on this on > is control circuits capable of adjusting the capable > every microsecond). It's fundamentally a reliability problem. Given nanotech I feel it could almost certainly be done, but given nanotechnology, you don't need it. :-( It's still an awesome idea. The inventor, Keith Lofstrom, contributed the variable speed cable going up 50 miles so the payloads don't go supersonic in the lower atmosphere. > Laser launch looks very feasible - the heat exchanger > rockets seem doable with today's technology, it's just > the control system that would require serious R&D. The > only issue with this launch type is that it launches a > huge number of very small packages skywards - Keith, > how small a package can you get away with for powersat > construction? A ton perhaps. Operated 20 hours a day they would be launching 100, one ton payloads an hour. If you need to cycle the lasers less often, then you would have to send up large payloads. Rockets at 1% efficient would take 20 5GW power sats making H2 and O2. I don't have the power consumption of laters. > Railgun/gas gun/launch track technologies - there > exist several possibilities for boosting things to > orbit with short,massive acceleration - I doubt solar > cells would survive it. > > The overall space launch market isn't huge at the > moment (55 launches in 2005, according to one report I > read - couldn't find what the total launch mass was > though). Power satellites require a massively bigger > capability than at present. On the other hand, massive > launch capabilities won't be developed unless there's > an industry crying out for it. So, keep on designing > the power satellites - it will keep the hope of space > resource utilisation going. > > Tom Done at all it would be an integrated business proposal package. Keith From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 11:00:05 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 04:00:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Thursday 27 March 2008, Tom Nowell wrote: > > I've been following the "getting big loads into orbit" > > discussions, and I'm quite a fan of the subject. > > I checked your list. You don't include LOX. The only reason we say "LOX > ain't cheap" is because nobody is making it cheap. You have oxygen all > around you. You need about 3000 PSI to get it down into the liquid > state, and then you're good to go. Let's work with that. Plus, we can > get more oxygen from the other side of the atmosphere as well. Brian, this is just getting the physics wrong. Long ago there might have been an excuse, but not with the net. It is impossible to get oxygen to the liquid state with pressure alone, the critical temperature is about -118.6 deg C. And people do make it cheap, less than 25 cents a liter. Fueling the rockets with electrolytic hydrogen is the only reasonable approach for a really large capacity lift, so while you still have to make it into a liquid, it come off as a no cost byproduct of making hydrogen. Keith From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 11:44:45 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:44:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803280644.45940.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 28 March 2008, Keith Henson wrote: > Brian, this is just getting the physics wrong. ?Long ago there might > have been an excuse, but not with the net. ?It is impossible to get > oxygen to the liquid state with pressure alone, the critical > temperature is about -118.6 deg C. ?And people do make it cheap, less > than 25 cents a liter. It was my understanding that the gas laws still apply. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_laws PV = nRT (the *ideal* gas law) > Fueling the rockets with electrolytic hydrogen is the only reasonable > approach for a really large capacity lift, so while you still have to > make it into a liquid, it come off as a no cost byproduct of making > hydrogen. Maybe the same fractional distillation method can be used to get H? - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From ain_ani at yahoo.com Fri Mar 28 15:28:57 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:28:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work Message-ID: <592947.24086.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Yes, i think the two terms properly are interchangable. 'Spiritual' is often used metaphorically in terms of the supernatural, but if we think of it terms of the German 'geist' it suddenly makes much more sense. ----- Original Message ---- From: Jef Allbright To: ExI chat list Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 3:43:42 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Wittgenstein's Other, More Important Work On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Michael Miller wrote: > so easily: they are the religious and the ethical. The 'spiritual' concerns > of man, if you will. Yes, that is the point. But rather than the mystically-laden term "spiritual", might we not refer to it as the subject of *meaning*? - Jef _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ain_ani at yahoo.com Fri Mar 28 15:40:10 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:40:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Apologies if this has already been covered, but I've been thinking for a little while about uploading and the attendent reduction of selfhood to brain processes. The following review (from New Scientist) makes some points which I think present the most compelling case against the viability of uploading. That is, that the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not something located in or identical with the brain - they are a facet of an entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole body and the social processes of which we are a part. Robert Pepperell puts it well in his book the Posthuman Condition when he says "Consciousness is the function of an organsm, not an organ". I wonder, how do the proponents of uploading argue against these ideas? Mike -- RAYMOND TALLIShas thought long, deeply and in a practical way about life, death andconsciousness: he is a recently retired professor of geriatric medicinespecialising in clinical neuroscience. He is also a philosopher andauthor of published fiction and poetry. His writings on the mind andbody display an intellectual breadth and distinctive style bordering onthat of a polymath. In his latest book, The Kingdom of Infinite Space,Tallis has decided to explore the head. Not the brain, but the head;this is not another book about consciousness, and only the finalchapter deals with it explicitly. Neuroscience and brain scans areconspicuously absent. Its subject is the head as a whole, and the waythat heads relate to selves. In fact, Tallis is exasperated by brain worship and the excessive claim that consciousness emerges exclusively from the firing of neurons. "Selves require bodies as well as brains, material environments as well as bodies, and societies as well as material environments," Tallis says in a fighting foreword. "That is why, despite the hype, we won't find in the brain an explanation of ourselves." The book gets the reader to think afresh about everyday experiences such as staring in the mirror, vision, breathing, speaking, hearing, face recognition, laughter, tickling, yawning, sweating, eating, spitting, smoking, vomiting, sleeping, ageing, sex and death. The pages burst with an entertaining mixture of intriguing facts and thought-provoking observations. On eating, for example, Tallis disagrees with writers such as Richard Dawkins, who treat hunger as nothing more than a biological drive. We must eat to survive, but there is a social dimension to stuffing our faces that Darwinians tend to minimise. The contrast between the raw and the cooked is the difference between nature and culture, as structural anthropologist Claude L?vi-Strauss pointed out. Cultural culinary codes can be elaborate and confusing to outsiders. On blushing, Tallis wonders why we do it, since it clearly draws attention to our vulnerability. He describes an attempted scientific study of the blush in young females. The aim was to prompt blushes under controlled conditions by exposing the subjects to suggestive material. The experiment failed totally, yet when the researcher thanked the women for participating, they apologised for their uncooperative cheeks and blushed scarlet. Andon thinking, Tallis muses: "Earwax is in my head. Mucus is in my head.My brain is in my head. But are my thoughts in my head?" There followsan accessible disquisition, influenced by the philosopher Gilbert Ryle,on whether thought and meaning are the kinds of things that occupyspace. "When, as I did from time to time, I applied a stethoscope to apatient's skull, I sometimes heard the bruit of the angioma I waslistening for but never even the slightest rumour of the thoughts thatI knew were ceaselessly passing through his mind," Tallis writes. While reading the book, one cannot help wishing that the digressions and detours were shorter. Without them, Tallis would not be Tallis, but the book would nevertheless have benefited from sympathetic, firm editing. It will not do to plead, as he does, that all worthwhile journeys involve frequently getting lost. Does The Kingdom of Infinite Spaceshed new light on the question of how physical processes in the braingive rise to subjective experience (the infamous "hard problem" ofconsciousness which neuroanatomist David Bainbridge recently dismissedas a "deceitful spectre" in Beyond the Zonules of Zinn)?Not really. But it enjoyably persuaded me that we need to attend moreto our heads than to our brains if we are to explain our selves toourselves. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 16:37:59 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:37:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803280937u17c578dbg929edaa868adb77a@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Michael Miller wrote: > > Apologies if this has already been covered, but I've been thinking for a > little while about uploading and the attendent reduction of selfhood to > brain processes. The following review (from New Scientist) makes some points > which I think present the most compelling case against the viability of > uploading. That is, that the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not > something located in or identical with the brain - they are a facet of an > entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole body and the social > processes of which we are a part. Robert Pepperell puts it well in his book > the Posthuman Condition when he says "Consciousness is the function of an > organsm, not an organ". > > > I wonder, how do the proponents of uploading argue against these ideas? > > > Mike In terms of common-sense values and priorities, core business vs. overhead. My fingernails are as much a part of my body as my lungs, but lungs are much more important. My body will stay basically the same without fingernails, but will die without lungs. So I think (like everyone) that lungs are more important than fingernails. Similarly, I agree that "Selves require bodies as well as brains, material environments as well as bodies, and societies as well as material environments". But in some very clear sense I would still be more-or-less-me without my body and surrounding environment, while I would not be me at all without the informational content of my brain. So I give much more importance to the informational content of my brain and would accept an uploaded copy, where only the information is preserved, as a valid continuation of my current self. Note that, if your valid point is taken too strictly and literally, then the WC in your toilet is as much a part of your core self as your thoughts and feelings. Sure you don't mean that! G. From jonkc at att.net Fri Mar 28 16:51:59 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:51:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003101c890f4$0ee33390$fcee4d0c@MyComputer> Michael Miller Wrote: > the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not something located in or > identical with the brain Exactly, and that's an idea fans of uploading have been trying to get across for years; we don't have thoughts we are thoughts, and thoughts are not responsible for the machinery that happens to think them. Why you believe that is a refutation of the uploading concept is beyond me. > they are a facet of an entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole > body and the social processes of which we are a part. Yea yea yea, I've been hearing that line for years, and whenever I do I ask "even if it's true how does it explain the fact (well you think it's a fact) that a collection of atoms right there is undoubtly you but an IDENTICAL collection of atoms over there is not you"? I seldom receive an answer to my question and when I do it's just a thinly disguises load of religious mumbo jumbo filled with euphemisms for the word "soul". John K Clark From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 28 17:09:04 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:09:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Jef Allbright wrote: Correction: s/within/by/ > Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency > **within an observer**, regardless of the physical, functional or > ontological status of the entity on whose behalf it acts, and even > when the observer is the agent itself. Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency **by an observer**, regardless of the physical, functional or ontological status of the entity on whose behalf it acts, and even when the observer is the agent itself. - Jef From ain_ani at yahoo.com Fri Mar 28 17:11:25 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:11:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thanks for the reply G. I'm not sure what you mean by 'core self'. If we do away with a supernatural 'self' or soul, then isn't the self merely a social construct, made up of our actions and interactions much more than our thoughts? I think the basic gist is, how can we even talk about 'self' without the social, embodied context which generates our sense of having a self - both in terms of 'oneself' and others? To assume that the self at its core is information, effectively replicates a religious supernaturalism in claiming that action and interaction (which are the processes by which our thoughts and feelings come to happen) are irrelevant. Can a self develop or persist without an environment in which it gains definition? To drag the conversation briefly back to Wittgenstein, if the WC is part of my world (ie it is in my experience) then it is a part of my self. Everything that we perceive and interact with goes towards making us what we are. The self does not stand isolated against the world, but are integral parts each of the other. ----- Original Message ---- From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 4:37:59 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Michael Miller wrote: > > Apologies if this has already been covered, but I've been thinking for a > little while about uploading and the attendent reduction of selfhood to > brain processes. The following review (from New Scientist) makes some points > which I think present the most compelling case against the viability of > uploading. That is, that the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not > something located in or identical with the brain - they are a facet of an > entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole body and the social > processes of which we are a part. Robert Pepperell puts it well in his book > the Posthuman Condition when he says "Consciousness is the function of an > organsm, not an organ". > > > I wonder, how do the proponents of uploading argue against these ideas? > > > Mike In terms of common-sense values and priorities, core business vs. overhead. My fingernails are as much a part of my body as my lungs, but lungs are much more important. My body will stay basically the same without fingernails, but will die without lungs. So I think (like everyone) that lungs are more important than fingernails. Similarly, I agree that "Selves require bodies as well as brains, material environments as well as bodies, and societies as well as material environments". But in some very clear sense I would still be more-or-less-me without my body and surrounding environment, while I would not be me at all without the informational content of my brain. So I give much more importance to the informational content of my brain and would accept an uploaded copy, where only the information is preserved, as a valid continuation of my current self. Note that, if your valid point is taken too strictly and literally, then the WC in your toilet is as much a part of your core self as your thoughts and feelings. Sure you don't mean that! G. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 17:45:00 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:45:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Plutonium In-Reply-To: <885762.34066.qm@web27001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <885762.34066.qm@web27001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Tom Nowell wrote: snip > The trouble for NASA is that getting the Pu-238 out > of the mix is expensive. When people were refining the > stuff to make weapons grade >92% Pu-239 (the report > gives handy definitions of different plutonium > grades), they separated out the Pu-238. They never did, it's extremely hard to do it, darn close to impossible. Think of how hard it is to sort out U235 from U238 and that's *three* atomic mass units. What the Russians did was to sort out the Neptunium 237 when they reprocessed fuel rods and stick that back in the reactor to absorb another neutron. From Wikipedia, Pu-238 Main article: Plutonium-238 There are small amounts of Pu-238 in the plutonium of usual plutonium-producing reactors. However, isotopic separation would be quite expensive compared to another method: when a U-235 atom captures a neutron, it is converted to an excited state of U-236. Some of the excited U-236 nuclei undergo fission, but some decay to the ground state of U-236 by emitting gamma radiation. Further neutron capture creates U-237 which has a half-life of 7 days and thus quickly decays to Np-237. Since nearly all neptunium is produced in this way or consists of isotopes which decay quickly, one gets nearly pure Np-237 by chemical separation of neptunium. After this chemical separation, Np-237 is again irradiated by reactor neutrons to be converted to Np-238 which decays to Pu-238 with a half-life of 2 days. The article isn't entirely accurate but for this discussion it lays out the method. If anyone wanted more of it, the method I discussed for making plutonium would work fine Keith From ain_ani at yahoo.com Fri Mar 28 17:34:22 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> John, I think my previous reply may have covered these issues, but to clarify: principally, the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery which generates them, whatever that machinery may be. They are not 'reducible' at all, especially the self, as it is not an isolatable thing. Therefore, to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set of hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural or metaphysical entity as the self. Secondly, the self is not identical with thoughts. The self, whenever we use the concept, is better understood as being based in social action. I have never experienced an identical set of atoms to my body, but if I were in that situation I would probably argue that my conscious experience correlated with what was happening to only one of those groups. However, I think we're barking up the wrong tree as soon as we start trying to pin down 'me' to a specific material object. There's no such thing as 'me'. And unless we're positing some kind of non-physical essential self, how can uploading be any kind of 'transferrence' or 'sequel' other than a simulation? ----- Original Message ---- From: John K Clark To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 4:51:59 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Michael Miller Wrote: > the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not something located in or > identical with the brain Exactly, and that's an idea fans of uploading have been trying to get across for years; we don't have thoughts we are thoughts, and thoughts are not responsible for the machinery that happens to think them. Why you believe that is a refutation of the uploading concept is beyond me. > they are a facet of an entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole > body and the social processes of which we are a part. Yea yea yea, I've been hearing that line for years, and whenever I do I ask "even if it's true how does it explain the fact (well you think it's a fact) that a collection of atoms right there is undoubtly you but an IDENTICAL collection of atoms over there is not you"? I seldom receive an answer to my question and when I do it's just a thinly disguises load of religious mumbo jumbo filled with euphemisms for the word "soul". John K Clark _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 18:10:31 2008 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:10:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: <200803280644.45940.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> <200803280644.45940.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 28 March 2008, Keith Henson wrote: > > Brian, this is just getting the physics wrong. Long ago there might > > have been an excuse, but not with the net. It is impossible to get > > oxygen to the liquid state with pressure alone, the critical > > temperature is about -118.6 deg C. And people do make it cheap, less > > than 25 cents a liter. > > It was my understanding that the gas laws still apply. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_laws > > PV = nRT (the *ideal* gas law) The laws don't apply when there is a change of phase. Steam, water and ice don't obey the same laws. > > Fueling the rockets with electrolytic hydrogen is the only reasonable > > approach for a really large capacity lift, so while you still have to > > make it into a liquid, it come off as a no cost byproduct of making > > hydrogen. > > Maybe the same fractional distillation method can be used to get H? No. The energy hog is splitting water. That yields a nearly pure stream of H2. It's not nearly as energy expensive to make H2 into a liquid as it is to make the gas from water. I could put numbers on it, but why don't you and I will verify your numbers. This level of knowledge was common by or even before high school some 50 years ago, at least among the proto nerds I hung out with. I strongly suggest that all those who want to contribute here on technical matters of this kind need to come up to that level by taking chemistry or reading up on chemistry and thermodynamics. Otherwise the noise to signal ratio gets out of hand. Best wishes, Keith From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 18:12:38 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:12:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520803281112h4a2cf5fds3c85e2df73949b44@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Michael Miller wrote: > > Thanks for the reply G. > I think the basic gist is, how can we even talk about 'self' without the > social, embodied context which generates our sense of having a self - both > in terms of 'oneself' and others? To assume that the self at its core is > information, effectively replicates a religious supernaturalism in claiming > that action and interaction (which are the processes by which our thoughts > and feelings come to happen) are irrelevant. Can a self develop or persist > without an environment in which it gains definition? I think John summed things up quite well: "don't have thoughts we are thoughts". I don't think we are talking of " 'self' without its social contest": a member of a upload society would still have social interactions, probably much richer than we can conceive, with other uploads and AI. The body: I assume a upload society would have technology able to simulate sensorial experiences up to any level of detail. Think that in 15 years we went from email to _almost believable_ VR worlds like Second Life, and that our primitive VR technology is progressing fast and may soon achieve full realism via direct neural stimulation. Back to our current meat bodies: of course I do not deny that our bodies have a very deep influence on our thoughts (us). But I do not consider headaches as an important defining factor of self. Insisting on our current weak and buggy bodies as a necessary part of a definition of self sounds to me too much like worship of nature, deep ecology, and other things we can do without. G. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 28 18:41:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:41:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328132715.026a7ea0@satx.rr.com> At 10:34 AM 3/28/2008 -0700, Michael Miller wrote in reply to JKC: >the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery which >generates them, whatever that machinery may be. They are not >'reducible' at all, especially the self, as it is not an isolatable >thing. Therefore, to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set >of hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural or >metaphysical entity as the self. ...unless we're positing some kind >of non-physical essential self, how can uploading be any kind of >'transferrence' or 'sequel' other than a simulation? Well, an emulation. John Clark's view is indeed a magical one--sympathetic magic, to be precise. This discussion has been going on here for well over a decade, so it's not going to get anywhere. But to me, the key issue remains this: If a 1-to-1 mapping is made of you, (a) will the mapping be convinced it's you? (Answer: of course, by definition), and (b) will you be convinced that the mapping over there is you, so that you'd now be very relaxed about being obliterated, whichever one you are? (Answer: you have to make up your own mind/s about that. My personal reaction: are you fucking *nuts*?) But John might well be correct that in a world where this tech is routine, people who share my current reaction will swiftly die off, overwhelmed by the growing numbers of those who *remember* being the people they emulate and hence feel fine about it. (Just shoot that terrified look-alike idiot and kick the corpse into the gutter? Maybe not, there's no call to be harsh to your progenitor--but no reason to be anxious over his death, either. Hey, the template's still in the uploader.) Damien Broderick From pharos at gmail.com Fri Mar 28 18:51:32 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:51:32 +0000 Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: References: <543742.54377.qm@web27011.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200803271822.57850.kanzure@gmail.com> <200803280644.45940.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > This level of knowledge was common by or even before high school some > 50 years ago, at least among the proto nerds I hung out with. I > strongly suggest that all those who want to contribute here on > technical matters of this kind need to come up to that level by taking > chemistry or reading up on chemistry and thermodynamics. Otherwise > the noise to signal ratio gets out of hand. > Hey Keith! You're spoiling the fun by bringing the real world into the discussion. Can't we just assume magic unobtainium, sorry, nanotech, will solve all such silly little objections? Here at London Heathrow airport they have just opened the new Terminal 5. Six years and 8,500 million USD and the teething problems have caused chaos. But apart from the chaos, it takes *that* much time and money for what is basically a big shed so that people and their suitcases can walk on to an aircraft. That's the real world of construction today. How about a difficult project? BillK From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 28 18:45:07 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:45:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ESP experiment on the web Message-ID: Apologies if this is a repeat. Please don't disclose the method here and spoil people's fun. - Jef From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Mar 28 19:00:06 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:00:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] ESP experiment on the web--Not In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328135817.023b23f8@satx.rr.com> At 11:45 AM 3/28/2008 -0700, Jef wrote: >Please don't disclose the method here and spoil people's fun. It's NOT an "ESP experiment." It's a pseudo-ESP gag. Damien Broderick From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 28 19:44:20 2008 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:44:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Announce: Launch of Surfing Samurai Robots blog/website In-Reply-To: <0ACA162C163941CE9E384B0DBA8CE299@mikepc> References: <3cf171fe0803241331g55a1fdedo1ecaa1c768b0017e@mail.gmail.com> <004101c88e14$f03b3000$d912a8c0@books.local> <47E93589.4000403@lightlink.com> <01a301c88ea3$466d22b0$d3476810$@com> <47E95C1A.4040301@lightlink.com> <024d01c88eb6$fab88d50$f029a7f0$@com> <47EA9071.5000806@earthlink.net> <009601c88fc4$0b316e50$21944af0$@com> <020a01c89012$d6cb06e0$846114a0$@com> <0ACA162C163941CE9E384B0DBA8CE299@mikepc> Message-ID: <47ED4A94.80708@lightlink.com> All, After a long time trying to get something more sophisticated out (while at the same time being constantly distracted by other tasks) I have finally decided to just go ahead and launch the Surfing Samurai Robots website as a blog. Rebelling against my own plans for a super-complex site architecture, I have gone for an utterly minimalist approach, not even bothering to change the default wordpress theme. Only one post on it so far: a simple declaration of purpose that should contain no surprises to anyone who has read my posts on the SL4, extropians, AGI and Singularity lists. You can find it at http://susaro.com/ Enjoy. Richard Loosemore From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Mar 28 17:01:22 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:01:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Michael Miller wrote: > > Apologies if this has already been covered, but I've been thinking for a > little while about uploading and the attendent reduction of selfhood to > brain processes. The following review (from New Scientist) makes some points > which I think present the most compelling case against the viability of > uploading. That is, that the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not > something located in or identical with the brain - they are a facet of an > entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole body and the social > processes of which we are a part. Robert Pepperell puts it well in his book > the Posthuman Condition when he says "Consciousness is the function of an > organsm, not an organ". > > > I wonder, how do the proponents of uploading argue against these ideas? Your post appears to indiscriminately blur concepts of entity and agency, consciousness and personal identity, but simply put, your assertion is similar to saying that the Microsoft Word software alone is not sufficient to represent the entity we know as Microsoft Word except within the context of an appropriate operating system, hardware environment..., and even to the extent of including the interactions of the user/observer. I would say yes, of course, and it's an important understanding, but this in no way precludes instantiating that software within various and even duplicate contexts while legitimately preserving perceived identity. However, on the same basis, two systems of any degree of functional physical/similarity may be not only non-identical but in active conflict with each other, again depending entirely on the context. An easy example is two physical/function copies of a person emerge from a duplicator device, and find themselves immediately in physical/functional conflict over control and enjoyment of property, spouse, etc. Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency **within an observer**, regardless of the physical, functional or ontological status of the entity on whose behalf it acts, and even when the observer is the agent itself. - Jef From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Fri Mar 28 22:36:47 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:36:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] powersats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <612237.42502.qm@web65412.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Keith Henson wrote: > No. The energy hog is splitting water. That yields a nearly pure > stream of H2. It's not nearly as energy expensive to make H2 into a > liquid as it is to make the gas from water. I could put numbers on > it, but why don't you and I will verify your numbers. It is a shame that it is so costly for us to do what a blade of grass does with ease. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_evolving_complex Of course we would still need an electron source to make the resultant protons into molecular hydrogen. But if we did, we could get rocket fuel from water and sunlight. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping From ain_ani at yahoo.com Sat Mar 29 00:21:40 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <651941.2240.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Okay. You see the reason I posited the question is that I'm trying to figure out what the metaphysics behind the belief in uploading is. The first point you raise, regarding a 1-to-1 mapping, makes me think: what is it precisely that we are trying to map? Is it the physical nature of the body as it is at one particular point in time? Or is it the physical state of the brain at one point in time? Because I think the idea that the two sources I quoted are getting at, is that there is a whole lot more to selfhood (and consciousness) than that. The self being a very fluid, loosely tied bag of stuff, we have inevitably to reduce it to some clear-cut definition in order to be able to 'map' it at all. If we accept that I now am not the same person I was seven years ago, then what exactly is it that we are trying to preserve via uploading? It cannot surely be a continuation of "my" consciousness if we accept the two can exist side by side. So, is it simply our pattern of behaviour? Secondly, how can we claim to know with precision the physical state (which is by definition a temporal process, not a static state) in order to map it '1-to-1'? Is the idea that we simulate the physical processes so that we are sure the virtual-brain behaves in precisely the same way a physical one would (ie, processing information in exactly the same way; dealing with sensory input in exactly the way a biological brain does)? How is this possible before we know how consciousness occurs as an epiphenomenon of physical processes? ----- Original Message ---- From: Damien Broderick To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 6:41:36 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood At 10:34 AM 3/28/2008 -0700, Michael Miller wrote in reply to JKC: >the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery which >generates them, whatever that machinery may be. They are not >'reducible' at all, especially the self, as it is not an isolatable >thing. Therefore, to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set >of hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural or >metaphysical entity as the self. ...unless we're positing some kind >of non-physical essential self, how can uploading be any kind of >'transferrence' or 'sequel' other than a simulation? Well, an emulation. John Clark's view is indeed a magical one--sympathetic magic, to be precise. This discussion has been going on here for well over a decade, so it's not going to get anywhere. But to me, the key issue remains this: If a 1-to-1 mapping is made of you, (a) will the mapping be convinced it's you? (Answer: of course, by definition), and (b) will you be convinced that the mapping over there is you, so that you'd now be very relaxed about being obliterated, whichever one you are? (Answer: you have to make up your own mind/s about that. My personal reaction: are you fucking *nuts*?) But John might well be correct that in a world where this tech is routine, people who share my current reaction will swiftly die off, overwhelmed by the growing numbers of those who *remember* being the people they emulate and hence feel fine about it. (Just shoot that terrified look-alike idiot and kick the corpse into the gutter? Maybe not, there's no call to be harsh to your progenitor--but no reason to be anxious over his death, either. Hey, the template's still in the uploader.) Damien Broderick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 29 01:13:13 2008 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:13:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ExI] bees again In-Reply-To: <200803231937.m2NJafpX024602@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803231937.m2NJafpX024602@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <38270.12.77.169.58.1206753193.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> > New subject please: unibee > > Forgive me for being such a repetive bugwatcher. Lat spring I went on and > on about seeing so many dying bees. To the observant bee watcher, this year > is startling indeed. Usually by the ides of March, my back yard is an > obscenely extravagant display of colorful blossoms. When at their peak > (usually about now) I can sit next to my house and easily hear the > collective buzz of hundreds of bees from the flowering vines on my back > fence, eagerly devouring that abundant pollen like a bunch of wild...um, > bees. > > Today is a perfect bee day, clear skies, no wind, 25C. There is exactly one > bee. A busy, happy one for sure, all those blossoms and no competition, but > still: one single lonely bee. > Well now, it's not just there. It's here too. I walked back from the bank and passed a young fruit tree in full bloom. The weather was warm enough and no wind... and not a bee to be seen. I checked the flowers in the beds around the Chamber of Commerce and no bees there either. When I got home I checked my garden and I had a *few* bees, but by then it was 6PM. Not encouraging. Regards, MB From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Mar 29 04:30:29 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:30:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] rice price Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> Uh-oh: Jump in Rice Price Fuels Fears of Unrest JAVIER BLAS and DANIEL TEN KATE - Financial Times (U.K.) LONDON and BANGKOK -- Rice prices jumped 30 per cent to an all-time high on Thursday, raising fears of fresh outbreaks of social unrest across Asia where the grain is a staple food for more than 2.5bn people. The increase came after Egypt, a leading exporter, imposed a formal ban on selling rice abroad to keep local prices down, and the Philippines announced plans for a major purchase of the grain in the international market to boost supplies. Global rice stocks are at their lowest since 1976. On Friday the Indian government imposed further restrictions on the exports of rice to combat rising local inflation, with traders warning that the new regime would de facto stop all India's non-basmati rice sales. The measures include raising the minimum price for selling abroad non-basmati rice by 53 per cent to $1,000 a tonne. Exports of premium basmati rice are likely to continue, although volumes could also suffer as the government also increased the minimum export price and scrapped export tax incentives. While prices of wheat, corn and other agricultural commodities have surged since late 2006, the increase in rice prices only started in January. The Egyptian export ban formalises a previously poorly enforced curb and follows similar restrictions imposed by Vietnam and India, the world's second- and third-largest exporters. Cambodia, a small seller, also on Thursday announced an export ban. These foreign sales restrictions have removed about a third of the rice traded in the international market. 'I have no idea how importing countries will get rice,' said Chookiat Ophaswongse, president of the Thai Rice Exporters Association. He forecast that prices would rise further. The Philippines, the world's largest buyer of the grain, said on Thursday it wanted to purchase 500,000 tonnes after it failed to buy a similar amount earlier this month. It is struggling to import 1.8m-2.1m tonnes to cover a production shortfall and on Thursday confirmed it would tap emergency stocks maintained by Vietnam and Thailand. Rice is also a staple in Africa, particularly for small countries such as Cameroon, Burkina Faso and Senegal that have already suffered social unrest because of high food prices. Thai rice, a global benchmark, was quoted on Thursday at $760 a tonne, up about 30 per cent from the previous daily quote of about $580 a tonne, according to Reuters data. Some traders, however, said the daily jump was not as steep, adding that Thai rice had already traded at about $700 a tonne this week. Rice prices have doubled since January, when the grain traded at about $380 a tonne, boosted by strong Asian, Middle Eastern and African demand. From pjmanney at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 05:20:33 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:20:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] LA Times: Season of Hope (was "bees again") Message-ID: <29666bf30803282220s2d9ffadawacdd4e0c3cab16c8@mail.gmail.com> Timed to Spike and MB's beewatching, I found this article in the Food section of the LA Times Wednesday on the effect of the lack of bees on the almond and honey industries. Extrapolated out, it's really scary stuff! And just so you don't think, "Almonds? Who cares?" Check out this quote: "California produces almost 80% of the world's almonds, grossing more than $2 billion in 2007. The state's almond exports are more than twice the value of its wine exports." To put that in perspective yet again, per the Wikipedia, "Agriculture (including fruit, vegetables, dairy, and wine) is a major California industry. In 2004 agriculture brought in $31.68 billion in revenue, making it more than twice the size of any other state's agriculture industry. In fact, California is the world's fifth largest supplier of food and agriculture commodities." Obviously, not all food production is directly dependent on bees. But indirectly...? Almonds are the canary in the mine shaft. PJ http://www.latimes.com/features/food/la-fo-almondbee26mar26,1,754447.story >From the Los Angeles Times FIELD REPORT Season of hope The growing California almond industry depends on honeybees to pollinate the trees. As Colony Collapse Disorder shrinks the bee population, the cost of renting hives has soared. By Russ Parsons Los Angeles Times Staff Writer March 26, 2008 BAKERSFIELD ? Every spring, just as the swallows return to Capistrano, so do the bees buzz back to Bakersfield. But don't expect to look up in the sky and see a swarm of them making their way west. These bees travel by truck. And though the place they're visiting is certainly beautiful, trees arranged in graceful all?es and topped with billowing white and pale pink clouds of blossoms, this trip is all business. The almond industry, which has emerged over the last decade as one of the biggest and most profitable in California agriculture, depends on bees for pollination. And so every spring, fully 60% of the commercially kept honeybees in the United States -- more than 1 million hives -- are trucked to California's Central Valley to do their thing. But what happens when one of the state's fastest-growing businesses depends on workers who are disappearing almost as quickly? That's what California's almond farmers are waiting to find out. California produces almost 80% of the world's almonds, grossing more than $2 billion in 2007. The state's almond exports are more than twice the value of its wine exports. While almonds have been growing into an agricultural powerhouse, bee populations have been dwindling. Most recently, plagued by a mysterious condition called Colony Collapse Disorder, or CCD, honeybee colonies across the country have been vanishing, abandoning perfectly good hives. Even after two years, no one yet knows why. Theories are many, but definite answers are few. And though the source of the disease is a mystery, its potential effects are not -- at least when it comes to almonds. Because it's this simple: Without bees, there are no nuts. Pretty as they are, if ever there was a plant that seemed designed to resist all efforts at domestication, it is the almond tree. Not only must the flowers be cross-pollinated with another almond variety, but because of the way the flowers are constructed, they rely on bees to do the pollinating. Other crops can be fertilized by birds, other bugs or even wind, but almonds need bees. Plus, almonds flower for only about three weeks and always early in the spring, when the bees are at their lowest energy, just emerging from their winter rest. So although most attention is focused on the fall harvest, almond farmer Matt Billings, 36, says it's this short period of time in the spring that makes or breaks his year. "If we don't have bees or if it rains or blows or anything else, we've got nothing else to do for the rest of the summer," he says. "The whole crop is determined in this three-week window." More almond trees EARLY one mid-February morning in Billings' orchards, with the valley fog still cool and clinging, the beehives look like board boxes that have been discarded on the dirt shoulders between the road and the trees. A second-generation almond farmer from Bakersfield, Billings and his father D ("no period, just D") farm about 1,000 acres of almond trees scattered along 30 miles of Highway 99 between Bakersfield and Earlimart. There are few sights in farming more beautiful than an orchard in spring, and that's especially true for almonds. "It kind of looks like a street in Paris, doesn't it?" asks Billings, and it kind of does. Up and down the valley, from south of Bakersfield to north of Modesto, there are similar orchards, covering more than a half-million acres total. Because almonds have been almost uniformly profitable for more than a decade, the acreage devoted to the crop has increased by almost a third since 1997 and is projected to increase by more than 20% over the next five years. If that happens, it's estimated that pollination will require the services of a whopping 70% of all the commercially kept bees in the U.S. And that's when what has been mainly an expensive inconvenience could turn into something more. Because while almond trees are being planted, honeybees are vanishing. The cause of CCD determinedly resists solution. The condition is as fickle as fate. One beekeeper might lose almost all of his hives while his neighbor, who follows exactly the same practices, escapes unscathed. "Whatever this is, it's not playing any favorites," says Eric Mussen of UC Davis, one of the leading apiculture experts in the United States. "Pretty much everywhere it's been, it's clobbered some people and not affected quite a few others." To a certain extent, these die-offs have happened periodically since at least as early as the 1890s and included spells during the mid-1960s and mid-1970s, when losses were severe and ended just as mysteriously as they began. In fact, the extent of last year's outbreak is unclear. Media reports were widespread, but a national survey of beekeepers found that only 23% reported CCD-like symptoms in their hives. Estimates for this year are similar. "That means a quarter of the beekeepers had the problem and three-quarters of them lucked out," Mussen says. "But while those lucky ones are certainly happy, they don't know why that happened or what will happen this year." Various culprits have been suggested: mites, viruses, poor nutrition, genetically modified plants, travel stress, pesticides, drought, and, of course, global warming. In all probability, Mussen says it's likely to be some combination of several of those factors rather than any one single cause. So far, the main effect of the shortage of bees has been skyrocketing prices for their services. The price has gotten so high that a flurry of honeybee rustling has occurred in the valley. Only five or six years ago, farmers could rent hives for $30 or $40 each. That's still the price for most crops, but today for almonds, the increased competition means pollination costs $140 to $150 per hive and sometimes more. Because it takes an average of two hives to pollinate an acre of trees, that can add up pretty quickly. Renting bees for 1,000 acres of almonds could run as much as $300,000 or more. D Billings says when he started farming almonds in the early 1970s, beekeepers would volunteer to park their hives in the orchards during bloom. Now, he says, he spends as much on pollination as he does on water -- astonishing in the parched southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. To facilitate pollination, almond orchards are usually planted with alternating rows of different varieties. The money nut is the Nonpareil variety, which is the pretty one that is most often sold for eating out of hand. The rest of the orchard will be divided between varieties that bloom early in the cycle and those that bloom late. These will go to breakfast cereal, baking, and candy and ice cream making. And even though this year's bloom was delayed by chill, once it got started the weather was for the most part warm and dry. But at this time of year it could just as easily have turned wet, cold or windy -- conditions that will keep the bees hidden in their hives. Indeed, even the cool of the morning keeps them close to home. In Billings' orchard, at first the hives look deserted. But as the air warms, the bees become more active. By the time the sun is high, the buzzing from their hives is audible a dozen yards away and you can see them boiling out of the gaps in the top -- off to work. In search of a good buzz IT'S this very industriousness that makes honeybees so valuable as pollinators. Turn a hive of bumblebees -- honeybees' big, black-faced cousins -- loose in an orchard and they'll amble one by one among the trees, pollinating with a lazy nonchalance. A hive of honeybees, though, will cover the trees in a swarm. Farmers find their bees in a variety of ways. Dig around on the website of the California Almond Board and you'll find a Craigslist-like directory of hundreds of beekeepers advertising their services. Other farmers use brokers, who coordinate the hives of smaller beekeepers. Most of these beekeepers are mom-and-pop operations. Mussen says a typical beekeeper needs to run about 1,000 hives to be profitable. A few bigger outfits manage 12,000 to 15,000 hives. For almost 25 years, the Billings have rented their bees from Dennis Arp, a beekeeper in Flagstaff, Ariz. "Every February they give us a couple of cases of honey and we give them a couple of boxes of almonds, that's how we start every year," Matt Billings says. Arp keeps around 1,000 colonies himself and uses his connections with other keepers to fill the Billings' demand. Some beekeepers have started flying hives in from Australia to meet their commitments. "The price just keeps creeping up," Arp says. "Sometimes I feel kind of sorry for the Billingses. I think what's happened is the numbers of acres of almonds kept increasing, but everyone still kept adding more almonds. The acreage kept increasing, but the population of bees didn't." High-mileage bees EVERY spring, about a week before the almond trees start to flower, Arp loads a bunch of his hives on the backs of a couple of semis and drives them to Delano. He unloads them in the cool evening, catches a few hours sleep, then drives back to repeat the trip with the remaining bees. When the bees are done working the almond trees, they'll be trucked to the Phoenix area, where Arp will put them in citrus groves to make orange blossom honey (honey from the nectar of almond flowers is too thin and bitter to be useful). From there they'll move on to high desert orange groves and finally wind up on desert wildflowers. Other beekeepers prefer to keep their charges pollinating. Some will stay in the Central Valley, working the peach, nectarine and plum orchards and then moving on to squash and melons. Others will travel as far north as Washington state to pollinate apples, cherries and pears. Or they'll go back east to work orchards and cranberry bogs there. And Arp has been affected by CCD. He says he lost 500 colonies last year and an additional 250 to 300 this year. He says he has spent $40,000 buying new colonies to replace those he lost -- a major expenditure for a small operation. "That was a little discouraging," says Arp, who seems every bit as laid-back as his charges are industrious. "The colony kind of goes from looking pretty good in the fall, to the population just disappearing. "From a beekeeper's point of view, everything looks real good, there's a good laying queen and lots of honey stored. And then two or three weeks later you go back and something has happened. Instead of the colony expanding and moving forward, it's going backward, and really fast. "I'm not really sure what's going on with it," he says. "I don't think [Colony Collapse Disorder] will be the end of beekeeping, but it's having an impact. I'm trying not to hit the panic button." That's about the same attitude the Billings have, running a million-dollar business that depends on the whims of a six-legged insect. "What will we do" if Colony Collapse Disorder problems continue? asks Matt. "Mostly worry. We've pretty much perfected that." For the immediate future, anyway, it's just another in a long list of inconveniences. Once again this spring it looks like the honeybees have done their job. russ.parsons at latimes.com From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 06:40:47 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:40:47 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 29/03/2008, Michael Miller wrote: > I think the basic gist is, how can we even talk about 'self' without the > social, embodied context which generates our sense of having a self - both > in terms of 'oneself' and others? To assume that the self at its core is > information, effectively replicates a religious supernaturalism in claiming > that action and interaction (which are the processes by which our thoughts > and feelings come to happen) are irrelevant. Can a self develop or persist > without an environment in which it gains definition? No doubt there would be something terribly wrong if you found yourself uploaded but completely cut off from environmental interaction. So, if you're considering being uploaded, you should make sure that you are given sensor and effector peripherals, or at least a very rich virtual environment. -- Stathis Papaioannou From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 07:27:31 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:27:31 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 29/03/2008, Michael Miller wrote: > I think my previous reply may have covered these issues, but to clarify: > principally, the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery which > generates them, whatever that machinery may be. They are not 'reducible' at > all, especially the self, as it is not an isolatable thing. Therefore, to > think that it can be 'transferred' from one set of hardware to another is to > posit some kind of supernatural or metaphysical entity as the self. > Secondly, the self is not identical with thoughts. The self, whenever we use > the concept, is better understood as being based in social action. > > I have never experienced an identical set of atoms to my body, but if I were > in that situation I would probably argue that my conscious experience > correlated with what was happening to only one of those groups. However, I > think we're barking up the wrong tree as soon as we start trying to pin down > 'me' to a specific material object. There's no such thing as 'me'. And > unless we're positing some kind of non-physical essential self, how can > uploading be any kind of 'transferrence' or 'sequel' other than a > simulation? Even if we can't say exactly what consciousness is or how it is generated, there are some obvious scientific observations about it that we can make. For example, a normally functioning brain seems necessary and sufficient for consciousness to occur. It seems necessary because if we destroy the brain the consciousness also stops, and it seems sufficient because a normally functioning brain leads to behaviour as if conscious, and there is no reason to believe that a subset of normally behaving humans are actually zombies. Also, continuity of consciousness with maintenance of a sense of self survives dissolution of the matter constituting the brain provided that it is replaced with matter of a similar type in a sufficiently similar configuration, since this is what happens in the course of normal metabolism. Now, all we have to do is show that consciousness and the self are preserved (or if you prefer, *appear* to be preserved in the same way as they appear to be preserved in the course of ordinary life) if biological tissue is replaced with functionally identical machinery. This is proved by the argument in the following paper: http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html It's a devastating argument for those who would hold on to the idea that consciousness is a quality unique to a particular substrate and cannot be simulated. I would be happy to summarise it if the paper is not clear. -- Stathis Papaioannou From scerir at libero.it Sat Mar 29 07:34:35 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:34:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] powersats References: <612237.42502.qm@web65412.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <405901c8916f$58b603a0$29bc1f97@archimede> The Avantguardian: > It is a shame that it is so costly for us to do > what a blade of grass does with ease. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_evolving_complex See also news like this one ... http://www.physorg.com/news125666441.html From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Sat Mar 29 14:44:20 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:44:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <47EE55C4.7030005@insightbb.com> > Can a self develop or persist without an environment in which it > gains definition? > > But while you sleep you are not interacting with the world. Are you saying that you cease to persist? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevinfreels at insightbb.com Sat Mar 29 14:50:24 2008 From: kevinfreels at insightbb.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:50:24 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328132715.026a7ea0@satx.rr.com> References: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080328132715.026a7ea0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <47EE5730.8080705@insightbb.com> Nice summary. SO clear and concise. I guess that's why I enhoy reading your books! lol Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:34 AM 3/28/2008 -0700, Michael Miller wrote in reply to JKC: > > >> the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery which >> generates them, whatever that machinery may be. They are not >> 'reducible' at all, especially the self, as it is not an isolatable >> thing. Therefore, to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set >> of hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural or >> metaphysical entity as the self. ...unless we're positing some kind >> of non-physical essential self, how can uploading be any kind of >> 'transferrence' or 'sequel' other than a simulation? >> > > Well, an emulation. John Clark's view is indeed a magical > one--sympathetic magic, to be precise. This discussion has been going > on here for well over a decade, so it's not going to get anywhere. > But to me, the key issue remains this: > > If a 1-to-1 mapping is made of you, > > (a) will the mapping be convinced it's you? > > (Answer: of course, by definition), and > > (b) will you be convinced that the mapping over there is you, so that > you'd now be very relaxed about being obliterated, whichever one you are? > > (Answer: you have to make up your own mind/s about that. My personal > reaction: are you fucking *nuts*?) > > But John might well be correct that in a world where this tech is > routine, people who share my current reaction will swiftly die off, > overwhelmed by the growing numbers of those who *remember* being the > people they emulate and hence feel fine about it. (Just shoot that > terrified look-alike idiot and kick the corpse into the gutter? Maybe > not, there's no call to be harsh to your progenitor--but no reason to > be anxious over his death, either. Hey, the template's still in the uploader.) > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ain_ani at yahoo.com Sat Mar 29 14:25:42 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <941338.40065.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Not quite. I'm saying that there's no such 'thing' as a self, in terms of being a delimitable object. The self is determined and defined by what happens around and to the body, not what happens inside 'the mind'. I suppose I think we're best off seeing selfhood as a process rather than a static entity. So, I wonder what will happen to selfhood when it is reduced to a pattern of information. Rules a reimposed upon us (it seems) by the physical world. But if our pattern of information is uploaded into a virtual world where, if laws exist at all, they will be very different than the natural ones, then how will this change our concept of individual identity? Will we still be able to talk or think in terms of individual identity? It's true that, while asleep we are less aware of the physical world and so seem to be reduced to our thoughts bouncing off each other (in the form of dreams). But still the physical world influences us. We have all experienced hearing the alarm clock as part of our dream, or the coldness of the room. But yes, I would say that selfhood, to all intents and purposes, has disappeared from us while we are asleep because we are relatively inert and not fulfilling the criteria for being a self at that time. Again, unless we're postulating some kind of metaphysical coherent self, how can it not? Even if we identify self with thoughts, during non-REM sleep there are no thoughts or perceptions, so where then is the self? The body is clearly present, but I don't think any of us would want to identify merely a living body with the self. Willed action is surely an integral part of the notion. Similarly, can a human living entirely in isolation be a self in the same way a highly social human is? Without the psychological/behavioural connection to other agents, the notion of what constitutes their identity appears somewhat dissolved. A tree may fall in the forest and create vibrations, but it is only a perceiving ear which turns those moving particles into "sound". ----- Original Message ---- From: Kevin Freels To: ExI chat list Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 2:44:20 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Cana self develop or persist without an environment in which it gainsdefinition? But while you sleep you are not interacting with the world. Are yousaying that you cease to persist? ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Sat Mar 29 15:31:26 2008 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:31:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] rice price In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <62c14240803290831u471b27e5vbb9289e36fcd948@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Uh-oh: > > Jump > in Rice Price Fuels Fears of Unrest > JAVIER BLAS and DANIEL TEN KATE - Financial Times (U.K.) > > > LONDON and BANGKOK -- Rice prices jumped 30 per cent to an all-time > high on Thursday, raising fears of fresh outbreaks of social unrest > across Asia where the grain is a staple food for more than 2.5bn people. Can you explain "Uh-oh" a little more? My initial impression is that the larger/largest populations require more of their local food so are less willing to export. That seems to make obvious sense. The polarization of east vs. west is as much a political problem as a business issue. I imagine corn farmers would like to make up for the shortage of rice. Another reason to stop commuting on corn and go back to eating it. If we could give up the corn syrup at the same time, we'd be much healthier for the effort. So what direction was "Uh-oh" going? From jonkc at att.net Sat Mar 29 15:45:34 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:45:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <753589.1245.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00a101c891b3$fd20fc30$eef14d0c@MyComputer> Michael Miller Wrote: > the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery >which generates them, whatever that machinery may be. Then it is not detectable with the scientific method and the word you are so desperately trying to avoid is "soul". > to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set of > hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural > or metaphysical entity as the self. The self is just as metaphysical as "swiftly" is, or "large", "red" or the number eleven. Not very. > The self, whenever we use the concept, is better understood > as being based in social action. So if I put you on a desert island with plenty of food but without a cell phone you would cease to exist. > I have never experienced an identical set of atoms to my body I haven't either, yet. > if I were in that situation I would probably argue that my > conscious experience correlated with what was happening > to only one of those groups. And that other group of atoms would be having exactly precisely the same thoughts, and if I pushed a button and claimed that you and that other group of atoms exchanged positions you'd have no way of knowing if I was telling the truth or not and thus no reason to care. > I think we're barking up the wrong tree as soon as we start > trying to pin down 'me' to a specific material object. And that contradicts what you were saying just one sentence ago. > unless we're positing some kind of non-physical essential self You're the one postulating something vastly important that cannot be detected with the scientific method not me. > There's no such thing as 'me'. Well you would know, however there is such a thing as me. John K Clark From ablainey at aol.com Sat Mar 29 16:03:09 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:03:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: References: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CA5FCD84A45EAA-458-280@WEBMAIL-DG15.sim.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: Stathis Papaioannou No doubt there would be something terribly wrong if you found yourself uploaded but completely cut off from environmental interaction. So, if you're considering being uploaded, you should make sure that you are given sensor and effector peripherals, or at least a very rich virtual environment. Personally I have got past the concerns with 'Self' in the uploading by insisting on an incremental transference of function for the upload process. For me, the next step in the thought chain and a big problem, is how we deal with issues like time dilation due to run speed. As soon as you are successfully uploaded, your perception of time would be dependent on the computational speed of the platform you are running on. Imagine an upload running at 1 million times faster than the normal human brain! You get uploaded and start running at this speed, just 1 second after the upload process completes, the technician who uploaded you asks if you are ok? This question would have come 11.5 days after you have been uploaded (from your perspective). And the question itself would take a couple of days to be asked! The world would effectively freeze at the point of uploading. This could be very scary for the first uploaded human, It could seem like millennia before another subject is uploaded to join you. With this amount of run time, the first upload subject could go mad, or just decide to take over the world! This could be very similar to a quick take off AGI scenario. Alex ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ain_ani at yahoo.com Sat Mar 29 17:22:58 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:22:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> John, you raise some interesting points. I for one would argue that "red" is entirely metaphysical: unless you can point to a physical object which fits the noun red, then what else can it be but metaphysical? As regards the self, I think we get further in understanding others' points of view by asking what they believe rather than telling them. This is what I am trying to do - if you think the self is comprehensible via the scientific method, can you elaborate on precisely what it is that the word points to? Regarding the two groups of identical atoms idea - one of my basic problems with this is that they will not be experiencing precisely the same thoughts, because they are located in different spaces. If you ask me a question, I will respond, if you ask the other group the question, I will know it is not directed at me. Whether an entirely identical group of atoms is actually possible or not is a moot point, but (as I think has been discussed) as soon as they are separated, the experiences will begin to diverge. This divergence would be even greater if one is a 'virtual' collection of atoms, designed by humans to replicate the processes and interactions of the material one...unless we were to go so far as to replicate the entire universe 1-to-1. Given how little we know about the material workings of the universe at this point, I would venture some kind of epistemological gap which will make such complete rendering quite impossible. I think the basic point I'm making here, is that there is not a 1-to-1 correlation between human concepts and words, and static material processes. Semantics always serves to create a generalisation which colours our thinking (and even our root perception) about the world. "Me" is a very simple word, but I think if we're trying to look for an objective entity fitting that description we will be very disappointed. It is, like red, entirely metaphysical...and this is not to say supernatural in any but the most metaphorical sense. ----- Original Message ---- From: John K Clark To: ExI chat list Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 3:45:34 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Michael Miller Wrote: > the self and thoughts are not reducible to the machinery >which generates them, whatever that machinery may be. Then it is not detectable with the scientific method and the word you are so desperately trying to avoid is "soul". > to think that it can be 'transferred' from one set of > hardware to another is to posit some kind of supernatural > or metaphysical entity as the self. The self is just as metaphysical as "swiftly" is, or "large", "red" or the number eleven. Not very. > The self, whenever we use the concept, is better understood > as being based in social action. So if I put you on a desert island with plenty of food but without a cell phone you would cease to exist. > I have never experienced an identical set of atoms to my body I haven't either, yet. > if I were in that situation I would probably argue that my > conscious experience correlated with what was happening > to only one of those groups. And that other group of atoms would be having exactly precisely the same thoughts, and if I pushed a button and claimed that you and that other group of atoms exchanged positions you'd have no way of knowing if I was telling the truth or not and thus no reason to care. > I think we're barking up the wrong tree as soon as we start > trying to pin down 'me' to a specific material object. And that contradicts what you were saying just one sentence ago. > unless we're positing some kind of non-physical essential self You're the one postulating something vastly important that cannot be detected with the scientific method not me. > There's no such thing as 'me'. Well you would know, however there is such a thing as me. John K Clark _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Sat Mar 29 17:34:40 2008 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:34:40 +0100 Subject: [ExI] rice price References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> <62c14240803290831u471b27e5vbb9289e36fcd948@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004601c891c3$31012cf0$22b91f97@archimede> Mike: > So what direction was "Uh-oh" going? >From east to west, is it called globalization? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization Bloomberg on rice price: http://tinyurl.com/2jqxyf From jonkc at att.net Sat Mar 29 21:08:47 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:08:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Michael Miller Wrote: > I for one would argue that "red" is entirely metaphysical: unless you can > point to a physical object which fits the noun red "Red" is an adjective as is "eleven" and "I", this is a fact however much third grade English teachers misinform their students. > if you think the self is comprehensible via the scientific method, can you > elaborate on precisely what it is that the word points to? I can't prove that the soul doesn't exist. And maybe some atoms really do have your name and only your name scratched on them in a way the scientific method cannot detect. And maybe by pure coincidence in your entire life you only ate drank and breathed atoms that just happened to have your name scratched on them. And maybe the other 6 billion people on the planet also just happened to eat drink and breathe atoms that had their names scratched on them too. Maybe, but I doubt it. > Regarding the two groups of identical atoms idea - one of my basic > problems with this is that they will not be experiencing precisely the > same thoughts, because they are located in different spaces. Position cannot possibly be the key to identity because of The Identity Of Indiscernibles; Leibniz discover the idea about 1690. He said that things that you can measure are what's important, and if there is no way to find a difference between two things then they are identical and switching the position of the objects does not change the physical state of the system. Leibniz's idea turned out to be very practical, although until the 20th century nobody realized it, before that his idea had no observable consequences because nobody could find two things that were exactly alike. Things changed dramatically when it was discovered that atoms have no scratches on them to tell them apart. By using The Identity Of Indiscernibles you can deduce one of the foundations of modern physics the fact that there must be two classes of particles, bosons like photons and fermions like electrons, and from there you can deduce The Pauli Exclusion Principle, and that is the basis of the periodic table of elements, and that is the basis of chemistry, and that is the basis of life. If The Identity Of Indiscernibles is wrong then this entire chain breaks down and you can throw Science into the trash can. Believe it or not I'm not exaggerating, it really is that important! One of the first and greatest discoveries in Quantum Mechanics was The Schr?dinger Wave Equation. It proved to be enormously useful in accurately predicting the results of experiments, and as the name implies it's an equation describing the movement of a wave, but embarrassingly it was not at all clear what it was talking about. Exactly what was waving? Schr?dinger thought it was a matter wave, but that didn't seem right to Max Born. Born reasoned that matter is not smeared around, only the probability of finding it is. Born was correct, whenever an electron is detected it always acts like a particle, it makes a dot when it hit's a phosphorus screen not a smudge, however the probability of finding that electron does act like a wave so you can't be certain exactly where that dot will be. Born showed that it's the square of the wave equation that describes the probability, the wave equation itself is sort of a useful mathematical fiction, like lines of longitude and latitude, because experimentally we can't measure the quantum wave function F(x) of a particle, we can only measure the intensity (square) of the wave function [F(x)]^2 because that's a probability and probability we can measure. Let's consider a very simple system with lots of space but only 2 particles in it. P(x) is the probability of finding two particles x distance apart, and we know that probability is the square of the wave function, so P(x) =[F(x)]^2. Now let's exchange the position of the particles in the system, the distance between them was x1 - x2 = x but is now x2 - x1 = -x. But The Identity Of Indiscernibles tells us that because the two particles are the same, no measurable change has been made, no change in probability, so P(x) = P(-x). Probability is just the square of the wave function so [F(x) ]^2 = [F(-x)]^2 . >From this we can tell that the Quantum wave function can be either an even function, F(x) = +F(-x), or an odd function, F(x) = -F(-x). Either type of function would work in our probability equation because the square of minus 1 is equal to the square of plus 1. It turns out both solutions have physical significance, particles with integer spin, bosons, have even wave functions, particles with half integer spin, fermions, have odd wave functions. All that came from The Identity Of Indiscernibles, it's the foundation of the idea of Exchange Forces, if it's wrong then most modern physics is gibberish. > If you ask me a question, I will respond, if you ask the other group the > question, I will know it is not directed at me. Yes, if you put them into an uncontrolled environment the world will soon treat them differently and then they will diverge and you would have 2 individuals not one. I would not be happy about having my body destroyed unless I had a copy that was made right now. How long is now? About a second, maybe two. John K Clark From ablainey at aol.com Sat Mar 29 22:43:25 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:43:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] ESP experiment on the web In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CA60056EDBC469-7E8-2AC3@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> LOL, I can't believe people are so unobservant ;o)...Oops, I mean baffled by the increadible pyschic powers of the computeeeeeeeer Ooooooooooh..... Alex -----Original Message----- From: Jef Allbright To: Extropy chat list Sent: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:45 Subject: [ExI] ESP experiment on the web Apologies if this is a repeat. Please don't disclose the method here and spoil people's fun. - Jef _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Sat Mar 29 22:48:48 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:48:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com><003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803190056t2637a2a3me5dfef90b31bb3b0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> John Grigg wrote: > my beloved "Profiles of the Future," Boy oh boy can I ever relate to that! I must have read that book when I was 9 or 10, and it created a singularity in my subjective life; an enormous asteroid just crashed into Chiksulub! In the unlikely event I survive the Singularity I will remember Arthur C. Clarke forever! And no, as much as I'd like to claim to be Arthur C. Clarke's illegitimate son as far as I know we are unrelated, although there were times I considered adding an "e" to my name. It's sort of interesting and I'm sure that Arthur would be amused at the coincidence that on the very day he died for the first time in human history a Gamma Ray burst occurred that was so bright that a human being could detect it with his naked eye, something that occurred halfway across the universe 8 billion years ago. It is by far the most distant object a human being could see with his naked eye. Nobody, absolutely nobody, could have stage managed Arthur C. Clarke's death more skillfully. I am impressed. It reminds me of his short story "The Star" where the Star of Bethlehem turned out to be a Supernova that incinerated a very advanced and noble civilization. I like that, I like that a lot, and I like to think Arthur would have been equally amused. I still haven't figured out exactly how Arthur persuaded that thing, whatever it was, to explode 8 billion years ago, but there is no reason I should have; Arthur was a man who was much smarter than me. John K Clark (unfortunately no "e") From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 29 23:43:13 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:43:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <200803300011.m2U0BJut009581@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > John K Clark > Subject: Re: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies > > John Grigg wrote: > > > my beloved "Profiles of the Future," > > Boy oh boy can I ever relate to that! I must have read that > book when I was 9 or 10, and it created a singularity in my > subjective life; an enormous asteroid just crashed into > Chiksulub! In the unlikely event I survive the Singularity I > will remember Arthur C. Clarke forever!... John K Clark (unfortunately no "e") John, Profiles of the Future smacked me upside the head when I was about 10 as well. For those who haven't read it, Damien's The Spike is kinda like an updated version of Profiles of the Future. It is my favorite Broderick book. spike jonese From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 30 00:52:48 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:52:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <200803300011.m2U0BJut009581@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> <200803300011.m2U0BJut009581@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> At 04:43 PM 3/29/2008 -0700, spike joenese wrote: >For those who haven't read it, Damien's The Spike is kinda like an updated >version of Profiles of the Future. Even for those who have. :) I know I'm not the one who should repeat this, but... In the final edition of Profiles of the Future, a book that had a profound impact on me, too, when I read it as an adolescent, shortly after it was published, I found this astonishing comment on p. 148: 'Since this chapter was written, these ideas have been developed in great detail by such writers as Eric Drexler (The Engines of Creation, 1986) and Damien Broderick (The Spike, 1997). Damien's book will serve as a more imaginative sequel to the one you are reading now.' Holy shit. As if that wasn't enough, a bit further on I found this delightful comment on page 189: 'In The Last Mortal Generation (1999), the Australian polymath and science fiction writer Damien Broderick has suggested that immortality is not merely desirable--but inevitable. My recommendation of this truly mind-stretching book was not in the least affected by its dedication: "For Arthur C. Clarke, who profiled the future and dreamed of advanced sciences indistinguishable from magic."' Sir Arthur liked showing people pictures of him taken with the Pope or US President or Russian astronaut du jour, or Werner von Braun, like that. Me, I like showing quotes with me and him... Damien Broderick From ain_ani at yahoo.com Sun Mar 30 00:58:04 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <116244.94355.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Okay. What then is the subject of the adjective 'I'? I wasn't asking you to prove the soul didn't exist. I was asking you to elaborate on what you mean by the word self. I think you have still managed to avoid telling us. I suspect that, although you are quick to criticise me for a perceived belief in a soul, it is yourself that is clinging to some kind of essential self...how else can your closing statement, "my body" be understood? If 'I' does not include this body, then what exactly is it that you are referring to? It seems very much like you are still trying to use the word I as a noun. I have a lot of respect for what little I know of Liebniz. However, I dispute that position is irrelevant to our discerning of different objects. Position is surely all that differentiates one atom from another. Position is what determines an object's relationship with other particles surrounding it. I suppose the point I'm getting at is, how do we isolate an object's state from it's position? Surely its state includes its position, as a different position will place it in a different relationship with the rest of the world. The simple fact is, that spatial position does go a long way towards making two things discernible. Finally (sorry if it seems like I'm disagreeing with everything you say!) I think we are unwise to talk about there being "facts" of language. We all know red, just like 11, and just like I, are commonly used as nouns. One person may say we are wrong to do so but that doesn't mean there is an objective truth to the meaning of a word. There are simply different usages. ----- Original Message ---- From: John K Clark To: ExI chat list Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 9:08:47 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Michael Miller Wrote: > I for one would argue that "red" is entirely metaphysical: unless you can > point to a physical object which fits the noun red "Red" is an adjective as is "eleven" and "I", this is a fact however much third grade English teachers misinform their students. > if you think the self is comprehensible via the scientific method, can you > elaborate on precisely what it is that the word points to? I can't prove that the soul doesn't exist. And maybe some atoms really do have your name and only your name scratched on them in a way the scientific method cannot detect. And maybe by pure coincidence in your entire life you only ate drank and breathed atoms that just happened to have your name scratched on them. And maybe the other 6 billion people on the planet also just happened to eat drink and breathe atoms that had their names scratched on them too. Maybe, but I doubt it. > Regarding the two groups of identical atoms idea - one of my basic > problems with this is that they will not be experiencing precisely the > same thoughts, because they are located in different spaces. Position cannot possibly be the key to identity because of The Identity Of Indiscernibles; Leibniz discover the idea about 1690. He said that things that you can measure are what's important, and if there is no way to find a difference between two things then they are identical and switching the position of the objects does not change the physical state of the system. Leibniz's idea turned out to be very practical, although until the 20th century nobody realized it, before that his idea had no observable consequences because nobody could find two things that were exactly alike. Things changed dramatically when it was discovered that atoms have no scratches on them to tell them apart. By using The Identity Of Indiscernibles you can deduce one of the foundations of modern physics the fact that there must be two classes of particles, bosons like photons and fermions like electrons, and from there you can deduce The Pauli Exclusion Principle, and that is the basis of the periodic table of elements, and that is the basis of chemistry, and that is the basis of life. If The Identity Of Indiscernibles is wrong then this entire chain breaks down and you can throw Science into the trash can. Believe it or not I'm not exaggerating, it really is that important! One of the first and greatest discoveries in Quantum Mechanics was The Schr?dinger Wave Equation. It proved to be enormously useful in accurately predicting the results of experiments, and as the name implies it's an equation describing the movement of a wave, but embarrassingly it was not at all clear what it was talking about. Exactly what was waving? Schr?dinger thought it was a matter wave, but that didn't seem right to Max Born. Born reasoned that matter is not smeared around, only the probability of finding it is. Born was correct, whenever an electron is detected it always acts like a particle, it makes a dot when it hit's a phosphorus screen not a smudge, however the probability of finding that electron does act like a wave so you can't be certain exactly where that dot will be. Born showed that it's the square of the wave equation that describes the probability, the wave equation itself is sort of a useful mathematical fiction, like lines of longitude and latitude, because experimentally we can't measure the quantum wave function F(x) of a particle, we can only measure the intensity (square) of the wave function [F(x)]^2 because that's a probability and probability we can measure. Let's consider a very simple system with lots of space but only 2 particles in it. P(x) is the probability of finding two particles x distance apart, and we know that probability is the square of the wave function, so P(x) =[F(x)]^2. Now let's exchange the position of the particles in the system, the distance between them was x1 - x2 = x but is now x2 - x1 = -x. But The Identity Of Indiscernibles tells us that because the two particles are the same, no measurable change has been made, no change in probability, so P(x) = P(-x). Probability is just the square of the wave function so [F(x) ]^2 = [F(-x)]^2 . >From this we can tell that the Quantum wave function can be either an even function, F(x) = +F(-x), or an odd function, F(x) = -F(-x). Either type of function would work in our probability equation because the square of minus 1 is equal to the square of plus 1. It turns out both solutions have physical significance, particles with integer spin, bosons, have even wave functions, particles with half integer spin, fermions, have odd wave functions. All that came from The Identity Of Indiscernibles, it's the foundation of the idea of Exchange Forces, if it's wrong then most modern physics is gibberish. > If you ask me a question, I will respond, if you ask the other group the > question, I will know it is not directed at me. Yes, if you put them into an uncontrolled environment the world will soon treat them differently and then they will diverge and you would have 2 individuals not one. I would not be happy about having my body destroyed unless I had a copy that was made right now. How long is now? About a second, maybe two. John K Clark _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ablainey at aol.com Sun Mar 30 01:04:45 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:04:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> References: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> <200803300011.m2U0BJut009581@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <8CA60192D229964-E14-7FA@webmail-dd21.sysops.aol.com> POP!..... was that your head Damien? :o) LOL It's nice to be recognised by someone you admire. It's a real shame I can't seem to finish a book. One day, if life stops getting in the way. Alex -----Original Message----- From: Damien Broderick To: ExI chat list Sent: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 0:52 Subject: Re: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies At 04:43 PM 3/29/2008 -0700, spike joenese wrote: >For those who haven't read it, Damien's The Spike is kinda like an updated >version of Profiles of the Future. Even for those who have. :) I know I'm not the one who should repeat this, but... In the final edition of Profiles of the Future, a book that had a profound impact on me, too, when I read it as an adolescent, shortly after it was published, I found this astonishing comment on p. 148: 'Since this chapter was written, these ideas have been developed in great detail by such writers as Eric Drexler (The Engines of Creation, 1986) and Damien Broderick (The Spike, 1997). Damien's book will serve as a more imaginative sequel to the one you are reading now.' Holy shit. As if that wasn't enough, a bit further on I found this delightful comment on page 189: 'In The Last Mortal Generation (1999), the Australian polymath and science fiction writer Damien Broderick has suggested that immortality is not merely desirable--but inevitable. My recommendation of this truly mind-stretching book was not in the least affected by its dedication: "For Arthur C. Clarke, who profiled the future and dreamed of advanced sciences indistinguishable from magic."' Sir Arthur liked showing people pictures of him taken with the Pope or US President or Russian astronaut du jour, or Werner von Braun, like that. Me, I like showing quotes with me and him... Damien Broderick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 01:18:47 2008 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:18:47 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 30/03/2008, John K Clark wrote: > Position cannot possibly be the key to identity because of The Identity > Of Indiscernibles; Leibniz discover the idea about 1690. He said that > things that you can measure are what's important, and if there is no > way to find a difference between two things then they are identical > and switching the position of the objects does not change the physical > state of the system. Why should position be disregarded as a property? The following excerpt is from the SEP article on the Identity of Indiscernibles: "Thus formulated, the actual truth of the Principle seems unproblematic for medium-sized objects, such as rocks and trees, for they are complex enough to have distinguishing or individuating features, and hence may always be distinguished by some slight physical difference. But fundamental principles are widely held to be non-contingent. We might require, therefore, that the Principle should hold even for hypothetical cases of qualitatively identical medium sized objects (e.g., clones which, contrary to fact, really are molecule for molecule replicas). In that case, we shall need to distinguish such objects by their spatial relations to other objects (e.g., where they are on the surface of the planet). In that case the Principle is consistent with a universe in which there are three qualitatively identical spheres A, B, and C where B and C are 3 units apart, C and A are 4 units apart and A and B are 5 units apart. In such a universe, A's being 5 units from B distinguishes it from C, and A's being 4 units from C distinguishes it from B. [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-indiscernible/] The finding of quantum mechanics that two subatomic particles are indistinguishable from each other does not mean they are one and the same particle. Two protons may have different momenta, and together they have double the mass of one proton. However, these considerations aren't really relevant to the question at hand. The fact is, I feel I remain the same person when I walk across a room despite the fact that I am clearly *not* identical throughout the process: not only are my atoms in a different position, they are also in a different position relative to each other, some have been absorbed from the atmosphere while others have been excreted, some have undergone radioactive decay, and so on. So if some process changes the matter in my body no more than walking across the room does, then I would have to remain feeling the same person despite that process. -- Stathis Papaioannou From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 30 01:41:04 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:41:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803300209.m2U29ADf028250@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > ...On Behalf Of Damien Broderick > ... > > Sir Arthur liked showing people pictures of him taken with > the Pope or US President or Russian astronaut du jour, or > Werner von Braun, like that. Me, I like showing quotes with > me and him... Pope schmope. President, bah (altho a picture with Reagan would be pretty cool.) Commie astronaut, dime a dozen. > developed in great detail by such writers as Eric Drexler > (The Engines of Creation, 1986) and Damien Broderick (The > Spike, 1997). Damien's book will serve as a more imaginative > sequel to the one you are reading now.' > ... Damien, had I been favorably compared to Clarke and the K. Eric, I would fall prostrate in worship of myself. Thanks for staying human. {8-] spike From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 30 01:48:08 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:48:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] earth hour In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803300216.m2U2GGxi015252@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Most of us here Google every day. So you know of the black screen in honor of Earth Hour: http://www.google.com/ With the following comments: Advanced Search Preferences Language Tools We've turned the lights out. Now it's your turn - Earth Hour. Earth Hour? I remember when that planet used to get a whole day. As time goes on, we have less of it, and there are ever more cool things to learn. A few years from now, perhaps it will need to be shortened again to Earth Minute, then eventually to Earth Nanosecond. spike From sentience at pobox.com Sun Mar 30 02:26:26 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:26:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] earth hour In-Reply-To: <200803300216.m2U2GGxi015252@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803300216.m2U2GGxi015252@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <47EEFA52.1000201@pobox.com> spike wrote: > > Earth Hour? I remember when that planet used to get a whole day. As time > goes on, we have less of it, and there are ever more cool things to learn. > A few years from now, perhaps it will need to be shortened again to Earth > Minute, then eventually to Earth Nanosecond. I was sorely tempted to post on Overcoming Bias that I intended to turn on all my lights for Earth Hour, by way of helping to prevent any drop in demand that might make my power company afraid to invest in building another 200 nuclear plants. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 30 02:41:46 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:41:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <200803300209.m2U29ADf028250@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> <200803300209.m2U29ADf028250@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329214000.023d9b78@satx.rr.com> At 06:41 PM 3/29/2008 -0700, spike wrote: >had I been favorably compared to Clarke and the K. Eric, I would >fall prostrate in worship of myself. Yeah, but Arthur and Eric had to dream it all up and work it all out themselves. I was able to steal swags of goodness from a bunch of extropes and >Hs... many of them, alas, now migrated to other pastures. Damien Broderick From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sun Mar 30 02:31:54 2008 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <95990.79352.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > It's sort of interesting and I'm sure that Arthur would be amused at > the > coincidence that on the very day he died for the first time in human > history a Gamma Ray burst occurred that was so bright that a human > being could detect it with his naked eye, something that occurred > halfway across the universe 8 billion years ago. It is by far the > most distant object a human being could see with his naked eye. > Nobody, absolutely nobody, could have stage managed > Arthur C. Clarke's death more skillfully. I am impressed. That's wondrous. Reminds me of story of Mark Twain being born with Haley's comet in the sky and dying upon its susequent return. Some people just have great timing. Stuart LaForge alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu "Life is the sum of all your choices." Albert Camus ____________________________________________________________________________________ OMG, Sweet deal for Yahoo! users/friends:Get A Month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. W00t http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text2.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 30 03:25:23 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:25:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies In-Reply-To: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080318164327.026129e0@satx.rr.com> <003001c88987$1c85cc20$e5f14d0c@MyComputer> <2d6187670803190056t2637a2a3me5dfef90b31bb3b0@mail.gmail.com> <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080329222130.024f1ed8@satx.rr.com> At 06:48 PM 3/29/2008 -0400, JKC, no e, wrote: >I'm sure that Arthur would be amused at the >coincidence that on the very day he died for the first time in human >history a Gamma Ray burst occurred that was so bright that a human >being could detect it with his naked eye, something that occurred >halfway across the universe 8 billion years ago. It is by far the >most distant object a human being could see with his naked eye. >Nobody, absolutely nobody, could have stage managed >Arthur C. Clarke's death more skillfully. I am impressed. Denis Overbye was, too, in the NYT on Tuesday: Great minds, and all... :) Damien Broderick From ablainey at aol.com Sun Mar 30 04:05:19 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:05:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood solution In-Reply-To: References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <8CA603266E741C9-1668-1200@webmail-db02.sysops.aol.com> I have been working on the problem of 'Self' and I have knocked up this rough draft of my solution. It is incomplete, but the bones are there. Feel free to rip to shreds or add your thoughts, appologies for spelling and grammer, its late and I have a ton of other things I should have been doing. Alex _____________________________________________________________________ The reversible, non destructive, Transference uploading technique version 0.9 by Alex Blainey ? Basic Step by step: ? The upload room, should ideally be simple and with little feature. A perfect simulation of the room is created within the upload computer. This computer is the substrate where the uploaded individual will be kept until the process has been deemed successful. ? The subject lays on a scanning table or similar. The subject is ideally paralysed to stop movement, but still retains all feeling. This step will probably not be essential depending on the capability of the scanning machine to account for movement. Presumably it would need to be able to, as it would need to account for movement of the diaphragm, heart, blood etc. ? The simulation of the room is run at a speed equivalent to real time, the upload will also be run at the same speed as the original subject to avoid asynchronous processes occurring between the subject and the upload. ? The scan begins. ? The scanning machine can measure any point in the body and can also remotely stimulate it. For example it could remotely stimulate a nerve to simulate a signal from an adjoining nerve. It can also remotely put any point of the body in stasis effectively freezing its function. In this way it can scan a neuron, then freeze it. Once scanned the neuron can be simulated in the upload.? Any stimulus that goes to this frozen original neuron from its neighbours can be registered. Then passed to the uploaded version which would act as the original. The function of the original being perfectly duplicated and the output from this upload neuron would then be passed back to the next in the subjects body, just as if the original were still functioning. ? In this way the scanning machine incrementally scans, replicates function, freezes the original and acts as a neural link between the original and the upload. This ensures that the subject remains conscious and functional throughout the process. Thus preserving the self throughout. ? The process continues like this with the system gradually moving function from the subject to the upload. In this way, the consciousness of the subject is gradually transferred from the original substrate to the new one. Leaving the original body frozen, while the consciousness now continues to seamlessly run in the uploaded state. ? It is desirable that all parts of the subject are simulated in the upload, the body, chemistry and all inputs and outputs. This would ensure that the uploaded state is identical to the human state and includes the many factors that the body chemistry contributes to the ?self?. ? The point of the process is to highlight any differences in the two states of human and upload. So in order to do this we need to include a very important step. That being the ability to transfer function back to the original parts of the body. In this way the subject would be aware of any changes between the two states, upload and human and any increments between that occur during the process. These differences be they changes in feeling, emotional state or any other factor that can be perceived by the subject. On rolling back to the original state after measured incremental function transferences have occurred, the subject will be able to say whether something is wrong or whether they have not perceived a difference. For example, after successfully transferring a section of brain and freezing the original, all may seem well. But on rolling back, the subject may shout ?Whoa man! It felt like I was a robot, stop the process!?. ? Ideally the entire process should be unperceivable to the subject. From there point of view, they have not moved and they are still in the same room. However they are now in an uploaded state, running on a computer and ?living? inside a simulated room. It may be necessary to simulate something impossible in order to convince them that the process has been successful and not just a bad practical joke. Perhaps this would be an ideal time to simulate a unicycling pink elephant singing ?Congratulations!? ? On completion of the process, various tests could be performed such as personality and memory testing to validate the responses of the upload. Or any other testing deemed necessary. Perhaps something specifically requested by the subject like memory tests which have been specified. For example, questions about event which only the subject knew about which could be have been documented by them prior to the upload. Then the answers reviewed to validate the uploads response. ? When the process is concluded by all to be successful, the upload is then free to go about their new immortal life. What ever that entails. Also we now have the issue of the original body. This is frozen in state and non functional, it?s consciousness having been transferred out. However as the upload process is reversible due to its transference nature. It is still possible to transfer the upload back to the body. This is very useful. An upload could exist in the new state for some time, getting used to it and experimenting, they could then be transferred back to the original body to be human again. This could be the definitive method of validating the uploaded state, as the now human again subject would be able to talk about what it was like (If they could articulate all of the experiences). This would be far more conclusive than an uploaded subject saying how wonderful it is in here and that ?you must come join us, jooiiin uuuuussss? It is also useful as the upload may in the future want to take the old body out for a spin once in a while. Just for old times sake. ? ? Of course there is a possibility that the process would have failed at some point, such as in the case of the subject saying the states are completely different. Should this occur, it would have highlighted that some part of the ?self? has been omitted from the upload. We could then either try to improve the process to include this, or it may be that the subject wants to go ahead with it anyway as the difference is small. Baring in mind that the body is still available it may be preferable to be incompletely uploaded rather than stay in mortal form. Ideally in this case,? whatever is missing can be scanned from the frozen body or where ever it is located and added to the upload at a later date. It may even be the case that some small part of the original body must be kept functional in order to complete the ?self? in the upload, such as where quantum entanglement or some other remote but connected influence plays a part. Obviously discovery of any such occurrences like this could cause problems, but it would also show us where to look for a solution. ? The subject may decide that the upload process is not yet ready, in which case they would be fully transferred back to the original body and would continue in mortal form until the process is better. If this were the case, then the uploaded version would be frozen during the transference back to the human state, leaving effectively a permanent backup copy of the subject resident in the computer. Albeit an incomplete version and now out of synch, this would still offer some semblance of immortality to most people. For example if the original were to be killed, the upload version could be unfrozen and continue in its own right. ? ? ? Conclusion This process is not perfect and many details are still being worked out, such as the synchronisation of memory when transferring and rolling back. Likewise with the synchronicity of the bodies chemistry and mechanical systems and circulation. These may be overcome by allowing the original and upload to run simultaneously during the process. Something which I am working on. These nuts and bolts kind of problems are of the type which are generally solved by the designers and builders of such systems rather than the theorists that initially think them up. Even more so in this case as we are theorising about technology which does not yet exist. So I won?t worry to much about the fine detail. But overall I believe that this method offers the most effective and acceptable process of uploading, which preserves the continuous stream of consciousness therefore addressing the issue of ?self?. It also allows for any immeasurable or remote part of the ?self? such as what some might call the soul. It also negates problems such as what to do with the original when an upload has been created by a simple duplication process and all the ethical dilemmas which this entails. Personally I would insist on being uploaded by such a process as it is the only method that addresses all of my own concerns.However that said, in an imminent death situation, any method of uploading would be preferable to the alternative. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ferox314 at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 06:10:24 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:10:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <47EE55C4.7030005@insightbb.com> References: <788421.2341.qm@web31508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <47EE55C4.7030005@insightbb.com> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803292310x123f441bucde2f658901af57@mail.gmail.com> On 3/29/08, Kevin Freels wrote: > But while you sleep you are not interacting with the world. Are you saying > that you cease to persist? Sleep is not total unconsciousness. It is a narrow-domain form of consciousness. You can still respond to stimuli, but the threshold is higher. Brain activity exists. Very specific EEG waveforms reflect the different stages of sleep. Coma, on the other hand, is total unconsciousness. And, rather than the awkward phrase "cease to persist," I would say that, yes, you cease to exist. JW From jonkc at att.net Sun Mar 30 06:11:54 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <116244.94355.qm@web31504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <007801c8922d$1ec093e0$edef4d0c@MyComputer> Michael Miller wrote: > Okay. What then is the subject of the adjective 'I'? Matter. I am the way atoms react when the are organized in a johnkclarkian way. > I was asking you to elaborate on what you mean by the word self. I think > you have still managed to avoid telling us. You are correct. I refuse to give a definition because I can provide something far far more important, an example. > although you are quick to criticise me for a perceived belief in a soul, > it is yourself that is clinging to some kind of essential self. Correct again. I have already stated that I believe in the self, so it is not unreasonable to suppose there is something essential in it, and that something is information, the closest thing the scientific method can get to the traditional concept of the soul. > I dispute that position is irrelevant to our discerning of different > objects. Liebniz was saying that if the objects in question are identical you can't even know their position, maybe it's there but maybe it's that identical thing over there. > We all know red, just like 11, and just like I, are commonly used as > nouns. And God Damn those idiot third grade English teachers! John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Mar 30 06:33:36 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:33:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5659260.html From jonkc at att.net Sun Mar 30 10:05:33 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 06:05:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Arthur C. Clarke dies References: <01ab01c891ef$18004020$35ee4d0c@MyComputer><200803300011.m2U0BJut009581@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080329194616.024dada8@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <044a01c8924d$b2fcfb00$edef4d0c@MyComputer> "Damien Broderick" Damien, given the fact that Arthur C. Clarke said good things about you I would tend to think you really do know do what you're talking about. But then, I already knew that. You're often wrong but you always know what you're talking about. I just wish Arthur C. Clarke had said something nice about me, that would have made my day. John K Clark (still no e) From painlord2k at yahoo.it Sat Mar 29 22:40:35 2008 From: painlord2k at yahoo.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:40:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] rice price In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080328232852.0243e6f0@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <47EEC563.8090109@yahoo.it> Damien Broderick ha scritto: > Uh-oh: > > Jump > in Rice Price Fuels Fears of Unrest JAVIER BLAS and DANIEL TEN KATE > - Financial Times (U.K.) It is interesting to note that Egypt and many M.E. countries are big net importer of food from Europe, North America and Australia. Saudi Arabia probably peaked its extraction of water from wells, as many farms in the desert stopped producing this year (there is an interesting article about this at "The Oil Drum" blog. High prices of food and oil will not be able to stop the growth of the world economy, as in the next years will move to more efficient cars (PHEV mainly), more solar (PV or thermo), nuclear power plants and so on. And will put a big pressure to the current politicians to accept and support GMO in agriculture and the development in advanced technology. The other [not so bad] side is that many nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran and so on, will be forced to spend much more to keep artificially down the prices of food for their poor populations. > http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/03/24/egypt.bread.riot.ap/index.html > Egypt tries to tackle deadly bread crisis - CNN.com > The government also will add 15 million new names to the list of > those receiving cheap rations of cooking oil, sugar and rice. That > and other measures will increase the government's annual food subsidy > costs by $3.1 billion to a total of $13.7 billion this year. This will help to reduce the fertility rate of islamic nations as well (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan - Iran, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia are already near substitution level or under it ). And this will force them to use more money to feed the people and prevent riots, revolts and revolutions at the expenses of support for da'wa (islamic proselitism), terrorist financing, mosque construction, financing of western universities and in western investments. Linking the price of the food to the price of the oil (biofuels) is perfect to take back the money from the oil producers and hamper their political hegemony confronting them directly. Mirco -- [Intangible capital is] the preponderant form of wealth. When we look at the shares of intangible capital across income classes, you see it goes from about 60 percent in low-income countries to 80 percent in high-income countries. That accords very much with the notion that what really makes countries wealthy is not the bits and pieces, it's the brainpower, and the institutions that harness that brainpower. It's the skills more than the rocks and minerals. ?Kirk Hamilton Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com From ain_ani at yahoo.com Sun Mar 30 12:34:31 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <995057.99049.qm@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> But if you cannot specify with precision what it is that makes this particular configuration of atoms "you", how can you claim a virtual emulation to be identical? Is it behaviour that you're saying fulfils the term johnkclark? Then, are you still not claiming some ethereal 'platonic form' of johnkclark-ness against which we measure? I think to claim that "johnkclark=matter organised in a johnkclarkian way" is a tautology. It's like saying we make bread by processing flour in such a way that it becomes bread. I'm not challenging you here or trying to disagree with you, I'm trying to understand what you mean because at the moment it doesn't make sense to me. Back to the identity of indiscernibles. "if the objects in question are identical you can't even know their position, maybe it's there but maybe it's that identical thing over there". Surely this works against itself (and your original point): if two objects are indiscernible even to the degree of their location, then in what sense are we talking about two objects? How can you combine this with an assertion that one of the objects is 'over there', as this itself implies a difference in location. I completely agree with the principle of identity, that A=A...but as soon as we start saying there's an A here and an A over there, but we can't actually discern their positions in order to tell them apart, then we have neither criteria for identity nor discernibility. We have a lack of definition which encompasses the possibility of both. It's an unresolvable trick of language. Do you see what I'm getting at? Maybe I'm me, but maybe I'm not me, I'm another thing which we can't differentiate from me. What is the meaning in saying this? I can't find one. Mike ----- Original Message ---- From: John K Clark To: ExI chat list Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 7:11:54 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Michael Miller wrote: > Okay. What then is the subject of the adjective 'I'? Matter. I am the way atoms react when the are organized in a johnkclarkian way. > I was asking you to elaborate on what you mean by the word self. I think > you have still managed to avoid telling us. You are correct. I refuse to give a definition because I can provide something far far more important, an example. > although you are quick to criticise me for a perceived belief in a soul, > it is yourself that is clinging to some kind of essential self. Correct again. I have already stated that I believe in the self, so it is not unreasonable to suppose there is something essential in it, and that something is information, the closest thing the scientific method can get to the traditional concept of the soul. > I dispute that position is irrelevant to our discerning of different > objects. Liebniz was saying that if the objects in question are identical you can't even know their position, maybe it's there but maybe it's that identical thing over there. > We all know red, just like 11, and just like I, are commonly used as > nouns. And God Damn those idiot third grade English teachers! John K Clark _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ____________________________________________________________________________________ Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text3.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 14:11:33 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:11:33 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Today: Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 Message-ID: <470a3c520803300711h4ab81e97s754b1725c935303e@mail.gmail.com> This is a reminder. Also don't forget that there has been a time change in EU. So the time of the meeting is: 10am SLT 10am PST (LA, SF) 1pm EST (NYC) 7pm EU (Madrid, Paris) 6mp UK (London) On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 > > Note: it is Lincoln Cannon and not Robert Geraci as it has been > announced to some lists. Robert ( > http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/religion_spirituality_and_the_avatar/ > ) will of course be invited to the talk and I hope he will come). > > http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/lincoln_cannon_of_the_mormon_transhumanist_association_in_second_life_march/ > > Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association will give a > presentation and a Q/A session in Second Life, on March 30 at 10:00 > PST, at the virtual headquarters of SL-Transhumanists. > > Abstract: Transhumanism is compatible with at least some religious > forms, as illustrated by parallels between basic Transhumanist ideas > and an authentic interpretation of Mormon metaphysics, theodicy, > eschatology and soteriology. These parallels also provide a basis from > which to judge the relative compatibility of other religious forms, > such as Christianity, with Transhumanism. > > SUNDAY - MARCH, 30 > > 1000 AM - 1200 PM SLT > > SL-Transhumanists @ extropia core > > SLURL > > The Mormon Transhumanist Association promotes practical faith in human > exaltation through charitable use of science and technology. The > association was founded on 3 March 2006 and affiliated with the World > Transhumanist Association on 6 July 2006. Read the Mormon > Transhumanist Affirmation: (1) We seek the spiritual and physical > exaltation of individuals and their anatomies, as well as communities > and their environments, according to their wills, desires and laws, to > the extent they are not oppressive. (2) We believe that scientific > knowledge and technological power are among the means ordained of God > to enable such exaltation, including realization of diverse prophetic > visions of transfiguration, immortality, resurrection, renewal of this > world, and the discovery and creation of worlds without end. (3) We > feel a duty to use science and technology according to wisdom and > inspiration, to identify and prepare for risks and responsibilities > associated with future advances, and to persuade others to do > likewise. > > Lincoln gave a talk last year at the Seminar on H+ and Religion in SL. > His presentation is archived here. His conclusions: "We believe that > scientific knowledge and technological power are among the means > ordained of God to enable such exaltation, including realization of > diverse prophetic visions of transfiguration, immortality, > resurrection, renewal of this world, and the discovery and creation of > worlds without end". This is, I believe, a perfect explanation of why, > despite what fundamentalists may say, transhumanism is not at all > incompatible with religion but, on the contrary, each of the two sets > of sensibilities can boost the other in a positive feedback loop. > > I did not know much (still don't) about Mormonism before meeting the > people of the Mormon Transhumanist Association. My mental image of > Mormons was (still is) derived from movies: people leaving in Utah, > always well dressed, very hardworking and much too serious (and men > with many wives). But my image of the MTA is that of a community of > smart and motivated transhumanists who see no conflict, but on the > contrary mutual reinforcement, between transhumanism and their faith. > And there must be something true in the images of Mormons as very > serious and hardworking people, because the MTA website is by far the > best transhumanist community site in terms of both IT implementation > and content. I consider the MTA as a transhumanist success story that > may be (I will ask Lincoln on Sunday) "exported" to other religions > and Christian denominations. > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 16:51:38 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:51:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <580930c20803300951leef590eq34bb1064b7473be2@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Michael Miller wrote: > Apologies if this has already been covered, but I've been thinking for a > little while about uploading and the attendent reduction of selfhood to > brain processes. The following review (from New Scientist) makes some points > which I think present the most compelling case against the viability of > uploading. That is, that the self (and specifically, thoughts) are not > something located in or identical with the brain - they are a facet of an > entire entity, dependent just as much on the whole body and the social > processes of which we are a part. I have discussed exactly this topic in an article published herein Giulio Prisco's blog (unfortunately in Italian). In short - while the idea that "consciousness" may have to do not just with the brain, along the line that peripherals are ultimately part of the computer, is likely to have some merits (the real experiment here have nothing to do with uploading, but rather with keeping a disembodied brain alive, connecting it to h some electronic interfaces, and seeing if and how it still works) - I do not believe that the case is so very compelling. When you have achieved a real-time low-level emulation of a human brain, to extend it to an emulation of an entire body is just a couple of orders of magnitude away in computing power and complexity, top. So, the real hard part is to achieve the first, the rest that might end up being necessary is likely to be trivial enough in comparison. Stefano -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkhenson at rogers.com Sun Mar 30 16:44:55 2008 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 09:44:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil Message-ID: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> I ran into this recently. http://www.drmillslmu.com/peakoil.htm Even if you don't buy into peak oil and the consequences, it's an interesting compilation. I disagree on only one point, this quote: "No combination of renewable energy systems have the potential to generate more than a fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels." -- Jay Hanson And most of you know why. Keith Henson From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 30 17:11:39 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:11:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200803301740.m2UHdjFH023152@andromeda.ziaspace.com> >...On Behalf Of Damien Broderick ... >...the Boy Scouts of America against > "increasing attacks" from "radical homosexuals, liberal > extremists" and the American Civil Liberties Union... In these increasing attacks, I would bet my money on the scouts. Reason: the scouts have a firearms merit badge, so a lot of them already know how to shoot straight by age 11. They could take up defensive positions beforehand on an outcropping or wooded meadow, then when the radical homosexuals and liberal extremists of the ACLU come out into the open in one of their increasing attacks, the boys would let em have it. {8^] My libertarian side is delighted with the current three-way mudfest between the remaining contenders for the white house. Since the battle is likely to carry on for several months, including the most eggregious and insulting personal attacks. The US proletariat becomes ever more convinced that these three are the worst people in America. For that reason, eventually no one likes any of them. The proletariat tends to look away from the government as their savior, creating a power vacuum which encourages every prole to look to herself as her own savior. This empowers the individual and weakens the office of the presidency and congress, reducing and decentralizing its total power, which proportionally reduces corruption. Life is gooood. spike From jonkc at att.net Sun Mar 30 17:33:16 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:33:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <995057.99049.qm@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002901c8928c$6f3c7910$b1ef4d0c@MyComputer> Michael Miller Wrote: > if you cannot specify with precision what it is that makes this particular > configuration of atoms "you", how can you claim a virtual emulation to > be identical? You cannot claim to know with precision what makes you you either, and yet you believe with all your heart that the you of yesterday is still alive today and you wish that the exact same thing happens to you again tomorrow. Don't try to deny it! Apparently precision is not necessary in this matter. > Is it behaviour that you're saying fulfils the term johnkclark? I'm saying for me to survive something must be around that remembers being me; and I'm saying that the idea some people around here like to push that I'm dead and I just think I'm alive is pure unadulterated gibberish. > I think to claim that "johnkclark=matter organised in a johnkclarkian > way" is a tautology. Yea, but so are all correct mathematical equations. > if two objects are indiscernible even to the degree of their location, > then in what sense are we talking about two objects? I can see two objects not one, and if I were an object then you would win this argument, but I am not an object, I am an adjective. I see two identical red cars but there is only one red and only one two. > Maybe I'm me, but maybe I'm not me There is only one me and maybe I'm here and maybe I'm over there but it doesn't matter because over there looks just like here. John K Clark From moulton at moulton.com Sun Mar 30 18:46:32 2008 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:46:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> The Boy Scouts organization also bars atheists from even joining. On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 01:33 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > Gov. Rick Perry attended the Senate District 14 convention in Austin > to urge his fellow Republicans to pass a resolution showing support > for the Boy Scouts of America against "increasing attacks" from > "radical homosexuals, liberal extremists" and the American Civil > Liberties Union. The Boy Scouts bar gays from serving as troop leaders.> From sentience at pobox.com Sun Mar 30 19:26:15 2008 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:26:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> Message-ID: <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> Fred C. Moulton wrote: > The Boy Scouts organization also bars atheists from even joining. Really? Sounds like a market opportunity for the Bayes Scouts. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 19:44:51 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:44:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Max More's blog (new) In-Reply-To: <20080328072744.QHDZ20598.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> References: <20080328072744.QHDZ20598.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803301244m1cbd8187m8fd70a83125ccc11@mail.gmail.com> Max, Excellent! I look forward to reading your insightful entries. But when is your book on Transhumanism going to come out? hee : ) I'm writing this from the World Horror Convention in Salt Lake City, Utah! I am having a great time and learning alot. The Bram Stoker awards ceremony last night was quite something! lol Best wishes, John Grigg On 3/28/08, Max More wrote: > > As you know, I'm an old-fashioned kind of guy. But I finally decided > to try this new-fangled "blog" thang. > > http://strategicphilosophy.blogspot.com/ > > > Max More, Ph.D. > Strategic Philosopher > www.maxmore.com > max at maxmore.com > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ferox314 at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 19:45:17 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:45:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 12:44 PM, hkhenson wrote: > I ran into this recently. > > http://www.drmillslmu.com/peakoil.htm > > Even if you don't buy into peak oil and the consequences, it's an > interesting compilation. It is irrelevant whether peak oil already happened, will happen soon, or will happen in the distant future. The supply-demand ratio is the relevant factor. As China and India take to the roads, oil prices will sky rocket. Already truck drivers are rumored to be planning a strike: http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/strike.asp Can you imagine what that will do to the economy? JW From pharos at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 20:19:38 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:19:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> <62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:45 PM, John Winters wrote: > It is irrelevant whether peak oil already happened, will happen soon, > or will happen in the distant future. The supply-demand ratio is the > relevant factor. As China and India take to the roads, oil prices > will sky rocket. Already truck drivers are rumored to be planning a > strike: > > http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/strike.asp > > Can you imagine what that will do to the economy? > Gasoline prices are already about three times higher in the UK (mostly due to tax) and our economy is doing just fine, thanks. The price of everything just ratchets upwards. If wages don't keep up, then you'll end up a bit poorer. Then people will buy more economical cars that do more miles per gallon, or just drive less. In the UK the over 60s get free travel on local buses (and trains in the London area). 'Free' in the sense that the cost is paid by other tax-paying members of society. But it reduces traffic congestion and fuel usage by persuading some over 60s to travel by bus instead of car. BillK From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 30 20:49:13 2008 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:49:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Max More's blog (new) In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803301244m1cbd8187m8fd70a83125ccc11@mail.gmail.co m> References: <20080328072744.QHDZ20598.hrndva-omta04.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> <2d6187670803301244m1cbd8187m8fd70a83125ccc11@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080330204914.WAMA13754.hrndva-omta02.mail.rr.com@D840DTB1.maxmore.com> At 02:44 PM 3/30/2008, John Grigg wrote: >Max, > >Excellent! I look forward to reading your insightful entries. But >when is your book on Transhumanism going to come out? hee : ) Thanks, John, but my book is not on transhumanism. Max Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 30 22:22:19 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:22:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] website ideas In-Reply-To: <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200803302250.m2UMoOG0006095@andromeda.ziaspace.com> I had two ideas for the web slinger's among us. If you get rich from either idea, do raise a glass of expensive wine in my honor. Idea 1. I have posted way too much stuff on ExI-chat about the dying bees last year, and their conspicuous absence this year. I just came in from the back yard: exactly one bee, where usually there are at least scores, if not a hundred or more. I might set up a website for bugwatchers: estimate and log the number of various insects, along with any other relevant information, such as time of year, place, temperature, etc, including each year's fruit harvest for those who have fruit trees. Idea 2. I talked to my brother in law today. He took his wife and daughters to a restaurant Friday. The next day he and both daughters were barfing sick. Wife was fine. Mighta been the restaurant? We should have a website where anyone who gets sick could report the details. Perhaps there is a disgruntled imployee horking goobers in the stew? Or a gruntled but sick employee unwittingly spreading something, or an ingredient that is a year beyond it's shelf life, or perhaps it is just a coincidence not related to the restaurant. Patterns might show up early. Any barf cluster could alert the health department and the management. Investigations might be made in time to spare untold suffering, ja? Is there already something like this somewhere? spike From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 30 23:27:25 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:27:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] website ideas In-Reply-To: <200803302250.m2UMoOG0006095@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803302250.m2UMoOG0006095@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <200803301827.25168.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 30 March 2008, spike wrote: > I had two ideas for the web slinger's among us. If you get rich from > either idea, do raise a glass of expensive wine in my honor. > > Idea 1. I have posted way too much stuff on ExI-chat about the dying > bees last year, and their conspicuous absence this year. I just came > in from the back yard: exactly one bee, where usually there are at > least scores, if not a hundred or more. I might set up a website for > bugwatchers: estimate and log the number of various insects, along > with any other relevant information, such as time of year, place, > temperature, etc, including each year's fruit harvest for those who > have fruit trees. This would be a simple wiki to do. If you want to do this, let's talk offlist about how to set up a website for these purposes, you might even be able to host it yourself if you have a stable internet connection. > Idea 2. I talked to my brother in law today. He took his wife and > daughters to a restaurant Friday. The next day he and both daughters > were barfing sick. Wife was fine. Mighta been the restaurant? We > should have a website where anyone who gets sick could report the > details. Perhaps there is a disgruntled imployee horking goobers in > the stew? Or a gruntled but sick employee unwittingly spreading > something, or an ingredient that is a year beyond it's shelf life, or > perhaps it is just a coincidence not related to the restaurant. > Patterns might show up early. Any barf cluster could alert the > health department and the management. Investigations might be made > in time to spare untold suffering, ja? > > Is there already something like this somewhere? http://fluwiki.com/ Speaking of websites and extropy-chat, I have for long wanted to do a review and categorization of most if not all emails, to make sure nothing is particularly lost. Maybe I'll go do this on my own wiki. Anybody interested in something like this? - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From ablainey at aol.com Mon Mar 31 00:06:04 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:06:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> Message-ID: <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> I had some thoughts a while back about creating an up to date version of the scouts, that does all the usual wholesome activities etc, with up to date things like car maintenance, Computers and also continues into early adulthood with some coming of age type benchmarks. The basic idea being to keep Yoof's off the street, give them a sense of self respect, a morally grounded peer group outside their family, and a sense of belonging in the community. I scrapped the idea as a no hoper after I caught a 10 year old kid scrumping apples from one of my trees. First I laughed at the little chap running around being egged on by his mates, Then I did the big bad house owner bit ' Get out of my garden, I know your Mum'. The reason I gave up on the idea was what happened next. He shouted 'Yeah F at ck @ff, You can't do anything you F at cking C at nt!!!' The whole group then started shouting words they shouldn't know and started throwing stones at my windows! Ahh bless em. Little F at ckers! Kids today, you just can't beat em (unfortunately) Alex -----Original Message----- From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky To: ExI chat list Sent: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:26 Subject: Re: [ExI] the really important urgent issues Fred C. Moulton wrote: > The Boy Scouts organization also bars atheists from even joining. Really? Sounds like a market opportunity for the Bayes Scouts. -- 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.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 00:22:23 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:22:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 30 March 2008, ablainey at aol.com wrote: >?I had some thoughts a while back about creating an up to date > version of the scouts, that does all the usual wholesome activities > etc, with up to date things like car maintenance, Computers and also > continues into ... adulthood The folks in the educational establishments are definitely not keeping up to date. It would be great if more professionals took to active community groups, like some sort of college, maybe they should call it community college. Oh, right, they have stringent acceptance rules. Guess it's time for an even better community-oriented college model? OpenCourseWare is a good start, maybe if we offered free server space to various communities and say "it's all free, you just need to run the public notices," things might change a bit? - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From ablainey at aol.com Mon Mar 31 01:25:13 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:25:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CA60E5339AB29A-228-E0C@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> Yes there are many things the education system could do. One thing I have a real gripe over is how every teacher (certainly in the uk) has to create there own lesson plans, some of which are pitifully bad. There is no standard despite there being a standard syllabus. So another recent idea I had, which I was thinking of setting up as a business, but have decided it would be better to just release the idea into public. Mainly as an altruistic gesture to the world, but also because I have far too much on my plate already and not enough experience in the educational field. So here it is, free, no patent or copyright and consider this a public demonstration negating any other attempts to patent it. (I am sure someone will try) The BrainPod. An education system for home schooling kids, adult students, extra curricular learning for school students, or just anyone that wants to improve their education. Basically its a cubical, similar in size to a shower also with similar bi-fold doors or some other type which allow them to be closed while inside . It comes flat packed for easy assembly. The cubical is sound proofed (as best possible), ventilated and includes good lighting. The most important item inside is a computer system with router. and obviously a good ergonomic seat. The Computer system is configured to log on to an educational network or web site. So each user of the computer will log on to their own personal area by means of biometric log on. In which they have access to various subjects and a syllabus to work through with computer based training and testing. This would be done at the speed of the student, rather than the usual try and drag em along with a lesson as per the school room. Should they find that they need help on a given subject, an icon would be clicked which sends a help alert. Also the computer lessons would also have many help features included and could be cross linked to other subjects that a dependencies. There would be a bank of online teachers (somewhere in the world, possibly volunteers?) 24/7 specialising in that particular subject (provably specialised and vetted) and an interactive chat session could be opened to provide help or an email sent. The pod would also include web cam, built in speakers for sound and a printer. The network would also offer lesson specific student forums, general forums, Online links to pre vetted relevant information. Access to test results etc. Lessons could also be downloaded for offline use. A useful feature would be a vocational specific rout planner, so that student could see exactly what kind of subjects they would need and what level to get into a certain job. This could even be streamlined to subsets of subjects, for example a roofer needs to know Trig and general maths, but not much calculus! There could even be a tie in with employers, where they could search for prospective employees according to their test results and visa versa. I think you get the idea and the possibilities are endless. The main idea being that it give a quiet, controlled environment for learning, without distractions and it has access to a huge standardised but flexible educational resource. I imagine the BrainPod being very cheap to mass produce to an agreed standard and supplied at an agreed price, with concessions or donated units for the poor. The construction materials needed and the whole computer setup could be sourced for a few hundred pounds/dollars. The back office systems are where the initial cash and work is needed, but I imagine all kinds of grants would be available and people who would gladly volunteer there time to help set it all up. And once the system is in place, it should be cheaply scalable as the teaching material would already be there. Obviously te initial system would be in? the Franca Lingua, English. But Perhaps this is one for Bill Gates to pour some of his 'improve the world' cash into?? I would be very pleased if he or someone like him did (So pass this on, if you have any access to him), but I would like to see this as a World education system, produced by countless companies and supported without seeing borders or politics. (LOL, could that happen?) Imagine kids and adults all over the world sitting in their little cubicles, swatting away There you go, if you like the idea, Run with it, improve it or pass it to someone that can. Alex -----Original Message----- From: Bryan Bishop To: ExI chat list Sent: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 1:22 Subject: Re: [ExI] the really important urgent issues On Sunday 30 March 2008, ablainey at aol.com wrote: >?I had some thoughts a while back about creating an up to date > version of the scouts, that does all the usual wholesome activities > etc, with up to date things like car maintenance, Computers and also > continues into ... adulthood The folks in the educational establishments are definitely not keeping up to date. It would be great if more professionals took to active community groups, like some sort of college, maybe they should call it community college. Oh, right, they have stringent acceptance rules. Guess it's time for an even better community-oriented college model? OpenCourseWare is a good start, maybe if we offered free server space to various communities and say "it's all free, you just need to run the public notices," things might change a bit? - Bryan ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ferox314 at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 02:20:17 2008 From: ferox314 at gmail.com (John Winters) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:20:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> <62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <62f900cb0803301920m3029131aj3de9a35f41db023b@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 4:19 PM, BillK wrote: > Gasoline prices are already about three times higher in the UK (mostly > due to tax) and our economy is doing just fine, thanks. Yes, but 1) the UK is much smaller and goods don't have to be transported as far, and 2) you have highly developed public transportation. Other than the northeast corridor and major cities, the US does not. Population density is far lower than Europe, making public transportation and freight transportation more difficult. > The price of everything just ratchets upwards. That's a bit of an understatement don't you think? The price of gas at the pump has doubled in five years in the US. This is a direct response to a *changing* supply-demand ratio. > If wages don't keep up, > then you'll end up a bit poorer. Then people will buy more economical > cars that do more miles per gallon, or just drive less. In the UK the > over 60s get free travel on local buses (and trains in the London > area). That transportation in the US needs to be overhauled is indisputable. How this will happen is yet to be determined. JW From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 02:11:13 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:11:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com> <67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803271540xccc4c94v36fa6efc22317db8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009901c892d4$89a89cf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Stefano wrote > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > > On the other hand, in case you're interested in a more logical distribution > > of nuclear warfare potential, I have several ideas that might interest you > > and other readers. > > > > Instead of the present arrangement we could > > > > (A) choose a nation at random to possess all of America's nuclear-related > > weapons. I suppose that there is just as good a chance of (most > > likely) some African nation being as or more responsible than the > > president of the U.S. > > (B) the United States could donate all of its nuclear arsenal to the U.N., > > although as in (A) most likely an African leader would end up in > > control of it. But at least it would be fair. > > (C) go back to the cold-war (which turned out well, by the way) using > > the MAD principle. So tomorrow the U.S. could just give away > > around half of its nuclear arsenal to, say, Russia or China. > > > > Or maybe you have some ideas of how an even better distribution > > of nuclear armaments could be devised that would be entirely > > superior to the present arrangement. > > No, I think your ideas are good enough, even though admittedly they would > be hard to implement face to obvious resistance from the interested party. "Good enough"? Then I take it that of A, B, or C above, you don't really have much of a problem with any of them, or at least one of them? (Myself, I don't find any of them in the least bit sensible or sane!) But if indeed you do affirm that they make sense to you, then *this* is what I call efficient discussion! Do you so affirm? So we see immediately upon what we disagree! Think of all the endless confusing posts we wisely avoided. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 02:28:44 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:28:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00d301c892d7$57db8f90$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jef writes > Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency > **by an observer**, regardless of the physical, functional or > ontological status of the entity on whose behalf it acts, and even > when the observer is the agent itself. It's a good thing that the subordinate clause "and even when the observer is the agent itself" is added, or one would evidently not survive the destruction of all the world's people and animals except oneself. But if personal identity is, as you write, only a function of perceived agency by some observer, then what about this following case? Suppose that there exists today a certain person who has rather low status for various reasons. One of these reasons is that he is convinced beyond any doubt that he is the Emperor Napoleon of the nineteenth century. When it's objected to him that it is not possible for Napoleon, born 1769 (as he well knows) to alive in the year 2008, he makes various denials of one kind or another. (It's partly because of the incoherence---just from our point of view, mind you---of his answers that his status is so low, and that he's receiving help in a mental institution.) Now then. A terrible plague manages to kill off everyone but him, as well as all Earth's animals. There is---it seems to me--- but one of your "observers" remaining, and that is this individual himself. Would you say that since "Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency by an observer....even when the observer is the agent itself", that the fact of the matter is this: The Emperor Napoleon (1769- ), formerly of France, but now living in a certain city in the U.S., turned out to be the last living human on Earth? Lee From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 02:36:40 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:36:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) In-Reply-To: <8CA60E5339AB29A-228-E0C@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> <8CA60E5339AB29A-228-E0C@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <200803302136.40283.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 30 March 2008, ablainey at aol.com wrote: > There you go, if you like the idea, Run with it, improve it or pass > it to someone that can. The BrainPod has been discussed before, see One Laptop Per Child [1] and perhaps Project C [2] and Project Gutenberg [3], Wikibooks [4], the Open Library Project [5], the Internet Archive [6], and then there's lots of software out there like OpenCourseWare [7] and digital online blackboards. Really all you need is to just package all of this stuff together, maybe Edubuntu? [8]. And then you need a cheap way to make the machinery ... or just port it like crazy to everything. :) - Bryan [1] http://laptop.org/ [2] http://bazaarmodel.org/ [3] http://gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page [4] http://en.wikibooks.org/ [5] http://openlibrary.org/ [6] http://archive.org/ [7] http://ocwfinder.com/ [8] http://edubuntu.org/ ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap From ablainey at aol.com Mon Mar 31 02:54:30 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:54:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) In-Reply-To: <200803302136.40283.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> <8CA60E5339AB29A-228-E0C@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> <200803302136.40283.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CA60F1ACE44069-1174-2B7E@mblk-d35.sysops.aol.com> Bryan said: 'Really all you need is to just package all of this stuff together' Yup, thats the point. The BrainPod is putting it all together in a standardised environment. (Thanks for the links, some I was not aware of) Alex -----Original Message----- From: Bryan Bishop To: ExI chat list Sent: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 3:36 Subject: Re: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) On Sunday 30 March 2008, ablainey at aol.com wrote: > There you go, if you like the idea, Run with it, improve it or pass > it to someone that can. The BrainPod has been discussed before, see One Laptop Per Child [1] and perhaps Project C [2] and Project Gutenberg [3], Wikibooks [4], the Open Library Project [5], the Internet Archive [6], and then there's lots of software out there like OpenCourseWare [7] and digital online blackboards. Really all you need is to just package all of this stuff together, maybe Edubuntu? [8]. And then you need a cheap way to make the machinery ... or just port it like crazy to everything. :) - Bryan [1] http://laptop.org/ [2] http://bazaarmodel.org/ [3] http://gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page [4] http://en.wikibooks.org/ [5] http://openlibrary.org/ [6] http://archive.org/ [7] http://ocwfinder.com/ [8] http://edubuntu.org/ ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ablainey at aol.com Mon Mar 31 03:06:17 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:06:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) In-Reply-To: <8CA60F1ACE44069-1174-2B7E@mblk-d35.sysops.aol.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <200803301922.23580.kanzure@gmail.com> <8CA60E5339AB29A-228-E0C@WEBMAIL-MC16.sysops.aol.com> <200803302136.40283.kanzure@gmail.com> <8CA60F1ACE44069-1174-2B7E@mblk-d35.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CA60F3524FB657-640-FC2@WEBMAIL-DG03.sim.aol.com> Bryan , Oops,I forgot to mention one very key point which relates to some of the other examples you made. The BrainPod would be universal. So just like you can use any computer to log on to the weband read your email. you could walk into any BrainPod and log on to your educational space to continue your work. I can imagine banks of them at places like libraries, universities, internet cafes etc. This gets around problems like One laptop per child. Which is great for that child when they get theirs, but what about the kid next door? I could see porting to every platform being the best way forward rather than specific machinery. why reinvent the wheel and need to update it constantly? Alex -----Original Message----- From: ablainey at aol.com To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Sent: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 3:54 Subject: Re: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) Bryan said: 'Really all you need is to just package all of this stuff together' Yup, thats the point. The BrainPod is putting it all together in a standardised environment. (Thanks for the links, some I was not aware of) Alex -----Original Message----- From: Bryan Bishop To: ExI chat list Sent: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 3:36 Subject: Re: [ExI] BrainPod (was re: the really important urgent issues) On Sunday 30 March 2008, ablainey at aol.com wrote: > There you go, if you like the idea, Run with it, improve it or pass > it to someone that can. The BrainPod has been discussed before, see One Laptop Per Child [1] and perhaps Project C [2] and Project Gutenberg [3], Wikibooks [4], the Open Library Project [5], the Internet Archive [6], and then there's lots of software out there like OpenCourseWare [7] and digital online blackboards. Really all you need is to just package all of this stuff together, maybe Edubuntu? [8]. And then you need a cheap way to make the machinery ... or just port it like crazy to everything. :) - Bryan [1] http://laptop.org/ [2] http://bazaarmodel.org/ [3] http://gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page [4] http://en.wikibooks.org/ [5] http://openlibrary.org/ [6] http://archive.org/ [7] http://ocwfinder.com/ [8] http://edubuntu.org/ ________________________________________ http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour now. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 31 02:59:02 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:59:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <62f900cb0803301920m3029131aj3de9a35f41db023b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200803310326.m2V3Pk5b010875@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > ... On Behalf Of John Winters > Subject: Re: [ExI] EP and Peak oil ... > > Yes, but 1) the UK is much smaller and goods don't have to be > transported as far... Clearly most processes in the US are absurdly inefficient. An example would be the distance that farm produce is hauled. We have built extended suburbs on good farmland. Sometime you will hear people say we paved over all this farmland, but this is not the case. Look at a typical suburb in the states. From the point of view of a driver on a street, it appears that it is all pavement, roads, buildings and parking lots. But look at your home town on Google maps. From that perspective, you will see *plenty* of unpaved ground even in the burbs. It is mostly all grass of course, but if we needed to, we could grow edible plants on that. It wouldn't sustain us completely, but could reduce our need for importing food. This is nothing new: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_garden We are not finished with the great urban colony collapse. Today I found a bee staggering around in my driveway. I took her inside. Within half an hour she was dead, in a manner similar to those I observed last year. Her stinger is intact and her wings are not tattered (so it isn't an age related fatality). {8-[ I haven't noticed any other bugs besides bees perishing. Any other bug watchers seeing anything noteworthy? The fruit trees will blossom in a few days. I will likely be out there with a foxtail brush trying to cross pollinate them manually. In the future, suburbanites may take up food production in their own yards as a hobby. spike From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 03:09:19 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:09:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <012501c892e0$1f76fb40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Clark writes > Position cannot possibly be the key to identity because of The Identity > Of Indiscernibles; Leibniz discover the idea about 1690. He said that > things that you can measure are what's important, and if there is no > way to find a difference between two things then they are identical > and switching the position of the objects does not change the physical > state of the system. > > Leibniz's idea turned out to be very practical, although until the > 20th century nobody realized it, before that his idea had no observable... Etc., which was very nicely written and makes the most important points concerning the entire issue very well. At the very end, however, comes this: >> If you ask me a question, I will respond, if you ask the other group the >> question, I will know it is not directed at me. > > Yes, if you put them [one's original set of atoms and a perfect copy] > into an uncontrolled environment the world will soon treat them > differently and then they will diverge and you would have 2 individuals > not one. Although I agree generally, it's really not because "the world will soon treat them differently" that matters. One might, for example, have a monk whose devotion and faith was so intense that even being forced to become an excellent soldier in an inhospitable environment had no effect on who he really was. For most people, however, I agree: given enough years, we gradually turn into other people. For me, though, it evidently takes centuries. > I would not be happy about having my body destroyed unless I had a > copy that was made right now. Nor would I be happy. Except.... > How long is now? About a second, maybe two. But why so short? Are you *that* attached to the last couple of seconds of your memories? What if you were struck on the head and lost all of today's and yesterday's memories? Wouldn't *you* survive? So---we just compose two non-identity threatening operations: memory loss + teleportation. Isn't the composition of those two operations also non-identity threatening? If you agree, then you should have no problem being replaced by your frozen duplicate in the next room who was made yesterday (given that either you or your duplicate must die, and given that if your decision is to be replaced by your duplicate, then $10M will appear in John K. Clark's bank account tomorrow). Moreover, there is a comprehensive equation I finally got around to formulating back in 2000: Self + Amn + Exp + Tel = Dup + Susp where Amn = Amnesia, Exp = experience, Tel = Teleportation, Dup = Duplication, Susp = Suspended animation, Lee P.S. Here is some accompanying explanatory text: The Exp and Susp terms, one on each side, force agreement in time. The Self and Dup make the equation balance in persons. The amnesia and experience terms cancel in the sense that they prevent an age difference between the two sides. An algebraic formulation is further justified in that transfer of the terms Amn, Exp, or Tel to the other side results in a different but informative (and correct) thought experiment. (It wouldn't make any sense to move the "susp" term to the other side where it would be negative, however, any more than it would for a revivified cryonicist in the far future to say, "I haven't changed, so why can't I go wake up instead back in 2000?". He can't have a negative suspension either.) From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 03:45:09 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:45:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net><62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> <62f900cb0803301920m3029131aj3de9a35f41db023b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <015201c892e2$3aeeeca0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Keith had posted this very nice link: http://www.drmillslmu.com/peakoil.htm and I had been looking for something recent. I do need to start a collection of these doom-and-gloom reports, which have been issued regularly at least since the 1940s. John Winters writes > That transportation in the US needs to be overhauled is indisputable. > How this will happen is yet to be determined. That's easy. The free market will do a great job of it, unless, of course, we get some very bright people into positions of power who think they know better. In which case, things indeed will go to hell very quickly. Remember: Malthus was simply wrong. Why? He failed to take changing technology into account. And what about the deer on that idiotic island? Not only didn't they have any technology, they didn't even have a market for scarce resources. Today's doomsayers are wrong. Why? They don't really understand how the free market works, and how, if people will just leave it alone, whatever alterations that need to take place will take place as gracefully as possible. Lee From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 31 04:03:42 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:03:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] solar cell innovation In-Reply-To: <200803310326.m2V3Pk5b010875@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <200803310430.m2V4UQLd007212@andromeda.ziaspace.com> The MIT guys are announcing solar cells that will deliver a buck a watt power, which would make it competitive with coal power: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/1366-technologies-solar-power-energy -panels.php In the next few decades, our gradual transition away from oil for transportation will include a hundred different solutions where currently there is really only one. I can envision single seat ape haulers that are radically down-sized and down-speed from our current absurdly over-capable inefficient units, for instance. They might be only a meter wide, a meter high and two meters long, weigh a modest 200 kg, range of 100 km (burning about two liters of octane in that distance), top speed of about 50 km/hr, plug-in hybrid, etc. I will miss my V8 guzzlebuggy, but I will get over it. Freight hauling can also be made much more energy efficient, if we accept top speeds of about 50 km/hr and true series hybrid drive train (very slow to accelerate, but saves a lot of weight and is very efficient). A good bicyclist could keep up with traffic on the freeway, no need to ride on the side of the road. Speaking of roads, we could make them glassy smooth, so as to obviate inefficient rugged duty vehicles for most applications. This enables vehicles that are much lighter, with light duty suspension. It isn't that hard to maintain roads to glassy smoothness. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 31 04:39:48 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:39:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <015201c892e2$3aeeeca0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> <62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com> <62f900cb0803301920m3029131aj3de9a35f41db023b@mail.gmail.com> <015201c892e2$3aeeeca0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330233042.02467518@satx.rr.com> At 08:45 PM 3/30/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: >The free market will do a great job of it, The free market in the USA? How free is that free market? >unless, >of course, we get some very bright people into positions of >power who think they know better. Ah, as in Enron, Halliburton, etc, as well as govt (rather often, the handmaiden of corporations)? >In which case, things indeed >will go to hell very quickly. Sometimes going to hell quickly is built in to the problem. Maybe this isn't one of those instances. Have there ever been *any* worrying situations in history, Lee, where a free market has failed to deal with them triumphantly? (This is *not* a question about whether there have been other polities or economic systems that did better. Sometimes when a ship goes down *everyone* drowns, even the good swimmers.) Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 31 04:49:22 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:49:22 -0500 Subject: [ExI] solar cell innovation In-Reply-To: <200803310430.m2V4UQLd007212@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200803310326.m2V3Pk5b010875@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <200803310430.m2V4UQLd007212@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330234127.024d1b08@satx.rr.com> At 09:03 PM 3/30/2008 -0700, spike wrote: >In the next few decades, our gradual transition away from oil for >transportation will include a hundred different solutions where currently >there is really only one. One of the graphs on the site Keith sent us to states that power generation uses a derisory amount of oil, < 2 %. How much is used for transport? Google points to 2/3 of total. Damien Broderick From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 05:36:05 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:36:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] solar cell innovation References: <200803310430.m2V4UQLd007212@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <017701c892f1$a9dfcfd0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Spike writes > The MIT guys are announcing solar cells that will deliver a buck a watt > power, which would make it competitive with coal power: > > http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/1366-technologies-solar-power-energy Good news, but not what we really need. > -panels.php > > In the next few decades, our gradual transition away from oil for > transportation will include a hundred different solutions where currently > there is really only one. I can envision single seat ape haulers that are > radically down-sized and down-speed from our current absurdly over-capable > inefficient units, for instance. It's too bad that we are having to waste all our enormous natural gas delivery capacity and resources on power plants, when they could very efficiently be powering our vehicles and provide good competition against oil. What we *should* be using for our power plants is nuclear energy, of course. Unfortunately the same idiot greens and politicians who got us into this mess (and, in California the same idiots who drove all the individually owned gas stations out of business with their deliberately contrived regulation), are going to be in charge of any changes down the road. We'll pay and pay, and our economy will be far slower and weaker than it would have been. Though I don't think there are any true Earth shaking disasters out there that we know about (not too much consoliation, that), my very existence and those of other cryonicists a century hence are being needlessly risked. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 05:50:44 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:50:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net><62f900cb0803301245h3db78eebj27cdb6af5701675e@mail.gmail.com><62f900cb0803301920m3029131aj3de9a35f41db023b@mail.gmail.com><015201c892e2$3aeeeca0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <7.0.1.0.2.20080330233042.02467518@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Damien writes > Lee wrote: > > > The free market will do a great job of it, > > The free market in the USA? How free is that free market? Good question! The more that certain kinds of politicians interfere with it, the less good a job it will do. > > unless, of course, we get some very bright people into > > positions of power who think they know better. > > Ah, as in Enron, Halliburton, etc, When crimes are committed, people need to be punished according to the law. Those at Enron were, and as for Halliburton, I'm not aware of what actual crimes have been committed---actual non-political crimes, that is. But if crimes have been committed, again, those responsible should be prosecuted. > Have there ever been *any* worrying situations in history, > Lee, where a free market has failed to deal with them > triumphantly? Certainly. Many, many. The free market has had little effect on deliberate invasions or plagues, for instance. Thomas Sowell describes economics as "study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses". No one has ever found a better way than the free market, even in war time, to distribute scarce resources which have alternate uses. > (This is *not* a question about whether there have been other > polities or economic systems that did better. Understood. > Sometimes when a ship goes down *everyone* drowns, even the > good swimmers.) Yes, though I don't recommend it because of its wordiness, Taleb's "The Black Swan" makes it thoroughly and very uncomfortably clear how unpredictable are future turning points and catastrophes. As I said in another post, I don't agree that any of the things we're currently worried about now will be the ones that do us in. If anything does, it will be unexpected---not "peak oil", "global warming", "overpopulation", or any of that crap. Maybe an epidemic? terrorist nukes? something-completely-out-of-left-field? I don't know, and neither does anyone else. Lee From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 09:16:21 2008 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:16:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 Message-ID: <470a3c520803310216x702ae54el170a1e7dc7040287@mail.gmail.com> It was a great talk, see a full report at http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/lincoln_cannon_of_the_mormon_transhumanist_association_in_second_life_march/ http://translook.com/ The article has a link to a videoclip, Lincoln's PPT slides and a full audio recording of the presentation and Q/A. From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 11:34:26 2008 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:34:26 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Gigideath was aboriginal humans In-Reply-To: <009901c892d4$89a89cf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net> <987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com> <67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803271540xccc4c94v36fa6efc22317db8@mail.gmail.com> <009901c892d4$89a89cf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <580930c20803310434y12588847n5665feb2594b6b65@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 4:11 AM, Lee Corbin wrote: > > > (A) choose a nation at random to possess all of America's > nuclear-related > > > weapons. I suppose that there is just as good a chance of (most > > > likely) some African nation being as or more responsible than the > > > president of the U.S. > > > (B) the United States could donate all of its nuclear arsenal to the > U.N., > > > although as in (A) most likely an African leader would end up in > > > control of it. But at least it would be fair. > > > (C) go back to the cold-war (which turned out well, by the way) using > > > the MAD principle. So tomorrow the U.S. could just give away > > > around half of its nuclear arsenal to, say, Russia or China. > > > > > > Or maybe you have some ideas of how an even better distribution > > > of nuclear armaments could be devised that would be entirely > > > superior to the present arrangement. > > > > No, I think your ideas are good enough, even though admittedly they > would > > be hard to implement face to obvious resistance from the interested > party. > > "Good enough"? Then I take it that of A, B, or C above, you don't really > have much of a problem with any of them, or at least one of them? > No, actually I do... :-) Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Mon Mar 31 14:32:35 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:32:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com><015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> <012501c892e0$1f76fb40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <004001c8933c$15048e00$eaee4d0c@MyComputer> Me: >> I would not be happy about having my body destroyed unless I had >> a copy that was made right now. How long is now? About a second, >> maybe two. "Lee Corbin" > But why so short? The thing about death that I personally don't like very much is having a last thought, if I knew it was my last thought then I'd be even more unhappy. I figure it takes about a second, maybe two, to have a thought. > What if you were struck on the head and lost all of today's and > yesterday's memories? Wouldn't *you* survive? Perhaps, but I sure as hell wouldn't be happy. > If you agree, then you should have no problem being replaced by > your frozen duplicate in the next room who was made yesterday I would have an astronomically large problem with that; yesterday was a very very long time ago and in this instance the changes made in me since then are far larger than in the typical 24 hours of my life; one is going through a traumatic experience and one is not. But that's just me, there is no arguing matters of taste. John K Clark From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 14:40:20 2008 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:40:20 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Dean kamen's robotic "Luke" arm References: <1206151529_4594@S4.cableone.net><987062.34834.qm@web65405.mail.ac4.yahoo.com><580930c20803250753s67b4dca5j58a05875137e7410@mail.gmail.com><580930c20803251242h1e53e6bakc8277614a0312b1b@mail.gmail.com><67cd01c88fb9$5b4a0b00$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><580930c20803271540xccc4c94v36fa6efc22317db8@mail.gmail.com><009901c892d4$89a89cf0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <580930c20803310434y12588847n5665feb2594b6b65@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <019101c8933d$273ee2e0$fd00a8c0@cpdhemm> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0_mLumx-6Y This keeps me wondering when are we going to be able to have an extra pair of arms. From jef at jefallbright.net Mon Mar 31 14:41:23 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:41:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <00d301c892d7$57db8f90$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <00d301c892d7$57db8f90$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > Jef writes > > > Personal identity is always only a function of perceived agency > > **by an observer**, regardless of the physical, functional or > > ontological status of the entity on whose behalf it acts, and even > > when the observer is the agent itself. > > It's a good thing that the subordinate clause "and even when the > observer is the agent itself" is added, or one would evidently > not survive the destruction of all the world's people and animals > except oneself. You're again highlighting that your interest in this topic is driven and framed by concern for personal survival. My interest in this topic is "merely" related to increasingly coherent conceptualizing, an essential piece of the well-equipped epistemological toolkit. Until a few years ago, I had seen it also as an opportunity to study the potential of otherwise excellent Western thinkers to escape the Cartesian singularity of self, but that experiment has been relegated, like my ventures as an eight-year-old attempting to prod Xians into a broader view, to a dim corner under a flickering neon sign with the words "Prospects for Increasingly Rational Decision-Making over an Increasing Context of Self." [Even for the 18kV neon sign transformer it's too big a chunk for the available charge.] > But if personal identity is, as you write, only a function of perceived > agency by some observer, then what about this following case? Perhaps it might help if we reword (somewhat clumsily but possibly to good effect) the above to "But if (perception of) personal identity is, as you write, only a function of agency as perceived by some observer..." it might help you see the point which you are consistently undershooting. Just a bit higher escape velocity, Lee, and you'll be able to look back and see the planet, er, the self, from a context both broader and more coherent. > Suppose that there exists today a certain person who has rather > low status for various reasons. One of these reasons is that he > is convinced beyond any doubt that he is the Emperor Napoleon > of the nineteenth century. When it's objected to him that it is > not possible for Napoleon, born 1769 (as he well knows) to > alive in the year 2008, he makes various denials of one kind > or another. (It's partly because of the incoherence---just from > our point of view, mind you---of his answers that his status is > so low, and that he's receiving help in a mental institution.) > > Now then. A terrible plague manages to kill off everyone but > him, as well as all Earth's animals. There is---it seems to me--- > but one of your "observers" remaining, and that is this individual > himself. Would you say that since "Personal identity is always > only a function of perceived agency by an observer....even > when the observer is the agent itself", that the fact of the matter > is this: > > The Emperor Napoleon (1769- ), formerly of France, but > now living in a certain city in the U.S., turned out to be the > last living human on Earth? > Lee, once again you're mixing your ontology with my epistemology, and it's not a good flavor combination. Your thought experiments characteristically convey the presumption of an omniscient observer. My point to you has always been that reality can't be in your model -- because your model is in reality. If there is only a single actor in your model, and that actor outputs "I am Napolean", then there is nothing in your model to suggest otherwise. But in "reality" no model exists in isolation, leading to my characteristic use of "increasingly" and emphasis of the importance of context. - Jef [Back to work] From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 31 14:47:16 2008 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:47:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com> > Subject: Re: [ExI] EP and Peak oil > > Damien writes ... > > > > Ah, as in Enron, Halliburton, etc, Halliburton is up to no good? What did they do? Why are they in the same class with Enron the criminal gang? Oh dear I have been out of touch to miss that one. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 31 15:56:37 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:56:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080331105247.0270c148@satx.rr.com> At 07:47 AM 3/31/2008 -0700, spike wrote: >Halliburton is up to no good? What did they do? Why are they in the same >class with Enron the criminal gang? e.g.: http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/ From pjmanney at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 16:13:41 2008 From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:13:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080331105247.0270c148@satx.rr.com> References: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080331105247.0270c148@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <29666bf30803310913t6896a539n4c79f1d5d5a37a8b@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/ Unprosecuted rape of Halliburton employee by fellow Halliburton/State Dept. employees: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702 Also billions missing in multiple no-bid contracts for unprovided services in Iraq -- many stories on that one -- just google... BTW, Lee, in my research on government/corporate collusion, this behavior is the rule, not the exception. So much for free markets. And really Spike, you must at least keep up with the news. :) PJ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 16:46:29 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:46:29 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 In-Reply-To: <470a3c520803310216x702ae54el170a1e7dc7040287@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520803310216x702ae54el170a1e7dc7040287@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803310946l4d69b006sa3966c135245929a@mail.gmail.com> Giulio, Thank you for the link and all the work you do! : ) I just finished attending the World Horror Writer's Convention and had an excellent time. The highlight was being invited to dinner with a favorite author and her family. She encouraged me to start writing. The kindness of strangers always amazes me. Best wishes, John Grigg On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > It was a great talk, see a full report at > > > http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/lincoln_cannon_of_the_mormon_transhumanist_association_in_second_life_march/ > > http://translook.com/ > > The article has a link to a videoclip, Lincoln's PPT slides and a full > audio recording of the presentation and Q/A. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 16:53:32 2008 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:53:32 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Lincoln Cannon of the Mormon Transhumanist Association in Second Life, March 30 In-Reply-To: <2d6187670803310946l4d69b006sa3966c135245929a@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520803310216x702ae54el170a1e7dc7040287@mail.gmail.com> <2d6187670803310946l4d69b006sa3966c135245929a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670803310953i68a02e43g9cdcf9c6993ee1e1@mail.gmail.com> Doh! I was thinking my previous email was to Giulio's personal email address. I'm using a friend's unwieldy (to me) computer (and my brain is tired from four days of very good but nearly non-stop panels). John On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:46 AM, John Grigg wrote: > Giulio, > > Thank you for the link and all the work you do! : ) > > I just finished attending the World Horror Writer's Convention and had an > excellent time. The highlight was being invited to dinner with a favorite > author and her family. She encouraged me to start writing. The kindness of > strangers always amazes me. > > Best wishes, > > John Grigg > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > > It was a great talk, see a full report at > > > > > > http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/lincoln_cannon_of_the_mormon_transhumanist_association_in_second_life_march/ > > > > http://translook.com/ > > > > The article has a link to a videoclip, Lincoln's PPT slides and a full > > audio recording of the presentation and Q/A. > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 20:10:30 2008 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:10:30 -0600 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 6:06 PM, wrote: > ...I caught a 10 year old kid scrumping apples from one of my trees. > He shouted 'Yeah F at ck @ff, You can't do > anything you F at cking C at nt!!!' The whole group then started shouting words > they shouldn't know and started throwing stones at my windows! Interesting. I wonder if you could make a video of their behavior and then post it to you tube and my space/facebook. And then send a heads up to their parents, though you might not have to. Best, Jeff Davis From jonkc at att.net Mon Mar 31 20:37:22 2008 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:37:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil. References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> Message-ID: <021701c8936f$1a6838f0$2dee4d0c@MyComputer> "hkhenson" > http://www.drmillslmu.com/peakoil.htm > Even if you don't buy into peak oil and the consequences, it's an > interesting compilation. I disagree on only one point, this quote: > "No combination of renewable energy systems have the potential to > generate more than a fraction of the power now being generated > by fossil fuels." > -- Jay Hanson > And most of you know why. Not me, I agree with the quote. Whatever is going to replace oil it will need to be HUGE, absolutely ENORMOUS! Wind farms and tidal energy just don't make the grade. Maybe solar energy could someday make a dent in the problem, but the technology just isn't there yet. Right now it would take a solar panel the size New Jersey to replace the energy dispensed by just 100 gas stations. There are about 20,000 gas stations in the USA alone. And yes, I've heard of solar power satellites, but are you so confident that the idea will be economically and ecologically feasible that you would be willing to invest your entire life savings into the idea and be prepared to live on the streets if it failed? I'm not. And I'm all for making things more efficient, but that's not going to solve the problem either, efficiency just makes energy cheaper, thus people will use more of it. You can fantasize about nuclear fusion (hot or cold) or vacuum zero point energy all you want but the cold hard reality is that right now only 5 technologies have the potential to replace oil. All of them would give Green Party tree huggers a tizzy fit (but then everything gives them a tizzy fit); and none of them are exactly cheap, except perhaps the last if we did it just right. They are: 1) Coal 2) Tar Sands 3) Oil Shale 4) Methane clathrate, (the least developed technology) 5) Nuclear Fission John K Clark From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 31 21:02:56 2008 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:02:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil. In-Reply-To: <021701c8936f$1a6838f0$2dee4d0c@MyComputer> References: <1206895587_26925@S3.cableone.net> <021701c8936f$1a6838f0$2dee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:37 PM, John K Clark wrote: > You can fantasize about nuclear fusion (hot or cold) or vacuum zero point > energy all you want but the cold hard reality is that right now only 5 > technologies have the potential to replace oil. All of them would give Green > Party tree huggers a tizzy fit (but then everything gives them a tizzy fit); > and none of them are exactly cheap, except perhaps the last if we did it > just right. They are: > > 1) Coal > 2) Tar Sands > 3) Oil Shale > 4) Methane clathrate, (the least developed technology) > 5) Nuclear Fission > The most excellent futurist Brian Wang has a post on this subject. Highlight Quote: Energy Plan Any reasonable energy plan has to look at still obtaining and using oil for the next ten to twenty years. This means enhanced oil recovery and new oil sources (such as the Bakken Formation) and new natural gas sources. -------------------- Everything else takes *that* long to make a dent in energy use. And nuclear power has to be much increased. BillK From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 21:33:01 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:33:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com><015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> <012501c892e0$1f76fb40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <004001c8933c$15048e00$eaee4d0c@MyComputer> Message-ID: <019001c89377$7b7055d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> John Clark writes >> What if you were struck on the head and lost all of today's and >> yesterday's memories? Wouldn't *you* survive? > > Perhaps, but I sure as hell wouldn't be happy. Well, unless there was a considerable reward involved, I would not be happy either. >> If you agree, then you should have no problem being replaced by >> your frozen duplicate in the next room who was made yesterday > > I would have an astronomically large problem with that; yesterday was > a very very long time ago and in this instance the changes made in me > since then are far larger than in the typical 24 hours of my life; But we are talking about TEN MILLION DOLLARS deposited to your account. Assuming that you are not already rich, won't that be enough? If not, would any amount of money? How about a *guaranteed* successful cryonics suspension and eventual upload? I want to know what is the least benefit that you will part with 24 hours memory for. Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 22:02:18 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:02:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood References: <552780.81939.qm@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com><00d301c892d7$57db8f90$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <019801c8937a$fe826230$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Jef writes > My interest in this topic is "merely" related to increasingly coherent > conceptualizing, an essential piece of the well-equipped > epistemological toolkit. Until a few years ago, I had seen it also as > an opportunity to study the potential of otherwise excellent Western > thinkers to escape the Cartesian singularity of self, but that > experiment has been relegated, like my ventures as an eight-year-old > attempting to prod Xians into a broader view, to a dim corner under a > flickering neon sign with the words "Prospects for Increasingly > Rational Decision-Making over an Increasing Context of Self." [Even > for the 18kV neon sign transformer it's too big a chunk for the > available charge.] Yep, it must be pretty frustrating. Good luck. > Perhaps it might help if we reword (somewhat clumsily but possibly to > good effect) the above to > "But if (perception of) personal identity > is [...] only a function of agency as perceived > by some observer..." That still leaves a lot of unanswered questions. Oh, and by the way, I do plead guilty to being focused upon personal *survival*. But, you see, what I really want to understand are the necessary and sufficient conditions that you endorse for the continued existence of a *person*----that is what the question of personal identity amounts to. Your slightly modified definition or characterization I have offset above fails to explain just when a "personal identity" ceases to be, even by degree. We were closer back in the days when you'd agree that a 6 year old Alice was not the same person as the 86 year old Alice. But it seems to me that you are becoming increasingly vague and obscure. > it might help you see the point which you are consistently > undershooting. Just a bit higher escape velocity, Lee, > and you'll be able to look back and see the planet, er, the self, from > a context both broader and more coherent. Heh, heh, yes. I know. I need to just "aim higher", be more aware of context, blah, blah, blah. In the meantime you seem utterly unable to give straightforward answers to utterly simple questions, such as >> Suppose that there exists today a certain person who has rather >> low status for various reasons. One of these reasons is that he >> is convinced beyond any doubt that he is the Emperor Napoleon >> of the nineteenth century. When it's objected to him that it is >> not possible for Napoleon, born 1769 (as he well knows) to >> alive in the year 2008, he makes various denials of one kind >> or another. (It's partly because of the incoherence---just from >> our point of view, mind you---of his answers that his status is >> so low, and that he's receiving help in a mental institution.) >> >> Now then. A terrible plague manages to kill off everyone but >> him, as well as all Earth's animals. There is---it seems to me--- >> but one of your "observers" remaining, and that is this individual >> himself. Would you say that since "Personal identity is always >> only a function of perceived agency by an observer....even >> when the observer is the agent itself", that the fact of the matter >> is this: >> >> The Emperor Napoleon (1769- ), formerly of France, but >> now living in a certain city in the U.S., turned out to be the >> last living human on Earth? Well, is that true or false? Don't you find it strange that 99.9% of Earth's present day people would have absolutely no problem answering this question? Perhaps you and Stefano should have a contest to see who can be the more evasive. I don't know who I'd bet on. > Lee, once again you're mixing your ontology with my > epistemology, and it's not a good flavor combination. Well, your mixture has seemed to leave you incapable of straight-talk. > Your thought experiments characteristically convey the presumption of > an omniscient observer. My point to you has always been that reality > can't be in your model -- because your model is in reality. We *know* that you are not a realist, and that you want to dismiss out of hand the entire realist school of philosophy. I am, at least, more generous to nominalists and whatever you are---though I really cannot imagine that you could or would have the modesty to subscribe to some school of thought, except that of the "Jef Albright Increasingly Lucid and Clear School". > If there is only a single actor in your model, and that actor > outputs "I am Napolean [Napoleon]", then there is nothing > in your model to suggest otherwise. Oh, I may have spoken too soon. So in that particular hypothetical scenario it is *true* that Napoleon (1769- ), formerly of France, but now living in a certain city in the U.S., turned out to be the last living human on Earth. I think that your talk of "models", epistemology, and ontology is preventing you from making yourself clear to other people, thus decreasing your perceived agency. Lee > But in "reality" no model exists in isolation, leading to my > characteristic use of "increasingly" and emphasis of the > importance of context. From jef at jefallbright.net Mon Mar 31 22:06:45 2008 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:06:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: <019001c89377$7b7055d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <184615.58336.qm@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <015001c891e1$30139d00$35ee4d0c@MyComputer> <012501c892e0$1f76fb40$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <004001c8933c$15048e00$eaee4d0c@MyComputer> <019001c89377$7b7055d0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Lee Corbin wrote: > But we are talking about TEN MILLION DOLLARS deposited to > your account. Remarkable! I just saw Lee Corbin fall into my Nigerian scam bit-bucket. - Jef From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 22:11:31 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:11:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil References: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677><200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com><7.0.1.0.2.20080331105247.0270c148@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803310913t6896a539n4c79f1d5d5a37a8b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01a501c8937c$67574720$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> PJ writes > BTW, Lee, in my research on government/corporate collusion, this > behavior is the rule, not the exception. So much for free markets. "So much for free markets"? Perhaps you can point out a few cases from history where some other system worked better to "distribute scarce resources which have alternate uses". I really would appreciate it. Damien had written > > (This is *not* a question about whether there have been > > other polities or economic systems that did better. > > Sometimes when a ship goes down *everyone* drowns, > > even the good swimmers.) and I did understand his concern. However your dismissal of this economic system really does imply that you have something better in mind. My problem with your idealism is that unless you can provide realistic examples from some time in the last 5000 years of recorded human history, there may just turn out to be something a tad impractical in your scheme. So, PJ, given a free hand, just how would or should a replacement for the market be devised? Lee From lcorbin at rawbw.com Mon Mar 31 22:18:46 2008 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:18:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil Message-ID: <01a601c8937d$cf0bc7f0$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> My apologies for replying rather too hastily to Damien with regard to his question. >>> Have there ever been *any* worrying situations in history, >>> Lee, where a free market has failed to deal with them >>> triumphantly? To which I replied > Certainly. Many, many. The free market has had little effect > on deliberate invasions or plagues, for instance. Thomas Sowell > describes economics as "study of the use of scarce resources > which have alternative uses". No one has ever found a better > way than the free market, even in war time, to distribute scarce > resources which have alternate uses. But I may have mistakenly given the impression that capitalism always works best when it's completely unregulated. I don't believe that to be the case. For example, the most efficient means of capital formation in western civilization appears to be the development of the limited liability corporation. Unfortunately, without supervision from some sovereign state (you see, I hate to the use the "g---" word), company managers take advantage of stock holders to such an extent that sooner or later funds dry up, thus retarding economic growth. Institutions such as the SEC are therefore necessary, so far as I have been able to determine. I believe that there are other examples in American and European history where governments have significantly contributed to economic growth, even though almost all of their well-intentioned efforts (like the current fiasco of burning corn for fuel) hurt a lot more than they help. Lee From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Mar 31 22:31:20 2008 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:31:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] EP and Peak oil In-Reply-To: <01a501c8937c$67574720$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> References: <017d01c892f3$9cabeb80$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> <200803311514.m2VFDxqg014566@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20080331105247.0270c148@satx.rr.com> <29666bf30803310913t6896a539n4c79f1d5d5a37a8b@mail.gmail.com> <01a501c8937c$67574720$6401a8c0@homeef7b612677> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080331173019.05df3198@satx.rr.com> At 03:11 PM 3/31/2008 -0700, Lee wrote: >[PJ:] > > BTW, Lee, in my research on government/corporate collusion, this > > behavior is the rule, not the exception. So much for free markets. > >"So much for free markets"? Perhaps you can point out a few cases >from history where some other system worked better to "distribute >scarce resources which have alternate uses". [...] >So, PJ, given a free hand, just how would or should a replacement >for the market be devised? This looks to me like another ideological kneejerk. PJ's point (I believe) is that what people seem to refer to as the US free market is generally--I might prefer "frequently" and "importantly" NOT A FREE MARKET but (read her lips) "government/corporate collusion." Damien Broderick From ain_ani at yahoo.com Mon Mar 31 22:34:36 2008 From: ain_ani at yahoo.com (Michael Miller) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:34:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood Message-ID: <277310.58630.qm@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Lee Said >> The Emperor Napoleon (1769- ), formerly of France, but >> now living in a certain city in the U.S., turned out to be the >> last living human on Earth? >Well, is that true or false? Sometimes matters don't divide up neatly into those two words. In fact, probably most of the time... ____________________________________________________________________________________ OMG, Sweet deal for Yahoo! users/friends:Get A Month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. W00t http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text2.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ablainey at aol.com Mon Mar 31 23:52:20 2008 From: ablainey at aol.com (ablainey at aol.com) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:52:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] the really important urgent issues In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080330013149.02370398@satx.rr.com> <1206902792.19732.1879.camel@hayek> <47EFE957.70200@pobox.com> <8CA60DA2569207D-FA4-21C1@MBLK-M05.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8CA61A16380C40E-FC8-271A@webmail-mf02.sysops.aol.com> That occurred to to afterward, but it makes you wonder what if anything the parents would do about it? After all, they are the ones that have been responsible for the moral education of these young un's. Haven't they done well so far !.Likewise I think the law is flaccid when it comes to this kind of behaviour in kids this age. Teachers are no longer allowed to deal out discipline and even parents are limited and watched like hawks under the guise of 'protecting kids from abuse'. I am truly worried for the next generation of 'I want it now, you cant do nuffin, I am the centre of the universe' kids. They clearly have their heads up their owns arses and have no respect for anyone or anything. At least we had respect and a healthy dose of fear. Very troubling indeed. Alex -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Davis To: ExI chat list Sent: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:10 Subject: Re: [ExI] the really important urgent issues On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 6:06 PM, wrote: > ...I caught a 10 year old kid scrumping apples from one of my trees. > He shouted 'Yeah F at ck @ff, You can't do > anything you F at cking C at nt!!!' The whole group then started shouting words > they shouldn't know and started throwing stones at my windows! Interesting. I wonder if you could make a video of their behavior and then post it to you tube and my space/facebook. And then send a heads up to their parents, though you might not have to. Best, Jeff Davis _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat ________________________________________________________________________ AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benboc at lineone.net Mon Mar 31 22:31:32 2008 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:31:32 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Uploading and selfhood In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47F16644.7070100@lineone.net> Damien wrote: > (b) will you be convinced that the mapping over there is you, so that > you'd now be very relaxed about being obliterated, whichever one you are? "So that"? Well, no! The one thing doesn't imply the other, no way! Why would being convinced that the "mapping over there" is you, lead to being relaxed about the other you, over here, being obliterated? This makes no sense (to me. See below). I don't see why people who make statements like this think they are saying something reasonable. "If you get copied EXACTLY, then one of the copies won't mind being killed" !?!?! Why on earth would anyone think this? I do think that an identical copy of my mind would be me, ('a me', if you like), and i'm sure that none of the me's would be happy (or relaxed, or indifferent) to be killed. I remember reading a short story in which people start committing suicide after the discovery that the multiple-worlds interpretation is in fact true, and everyone has an infinite number of versions of them in an infinite number of universes. I also remember thinking that this story _makes no sense_. Would YOU commit suicide just because you knew for a fact that there was another you somewhere? It's just a daft idea. This whole thing has had me puzzled for a while, and i've come to the conclusion that the various people who take part in these arguments don't necessarily disagree as much as it seems. I think that they simply don't understand each other. It seems that the concepts involved are inherently confusing, and so when i say that an exact copy of me is me in every way, someone else who hears that, understands something different to what i understand by it. Possibly some of this is due to the Dualist vs. Materialist polarisation, but i think that there's more to it than that (despite the fact that some people who claim to be materialists turn out to be 'crypto-dualists', as though they don't really 'get' what materialism actually is). I know that this is a tired old subject for this list, but i think it bears saying that maybe we have a situation like two differently-colourblind people discussing a painting. They both look at the same object but they're actually seeing two different things. ben zaiboc